Slawomir

You are a right-wing institutionalist, less interested in nostalgia than in who sets the rules and who pays for them. Your UK is governed through domestic democratic authority, robust public order and fiscal limits: replace human-rights treaties with a UK bill of rights, cut quangos, protect the pound, and stop treating every international commitment as an open-ended cheque.

From The Self-Reliance Disciplinarian, you have become The Civic Gatekeeper: constitutional instinct has crossed from Right into Centre Left across your record, even as housing has remained firmly Hard Right throughout. That is a settled preference for ownership and supply alongside a more disruptive view of the constitutional settlement.

In the week of 2026-W28, your scored votes sat on the Right. The telling detail was not merely opposition to reparations or asylum seekers working: you argued that claims should be verified and people vetted before access to public life, revealing a politics of membership with conditions, not simply exclusion.

You usually run with the national majority, including on cutting immigration, scrapping quangos and resisting a wealth tax. Where you depart, it is often in the direction of tougher institutional control: the UK backed rehabilitation programmes, whereas you rejected them; most supported cool roofs, whereas you saw another imposed green fix.

You broadly travel with your right-leaning circle, especially KeenVoter93, your close ally on defence and energy; PaulLondoner is the exception, a near-inverse match across the questions you share.

This record now has real breadth behind it; the live question is whether your constitutional turn becomes a fuller democratic reform agenda or remains an instinct against external constraint. Three more votes unlock a fresh read, and every ballot makes the picture truer.

You are solidly right, but your politics are more than immigration and law-and-order: work, housing and energy are the load-bearing beams. “The state should reward work,” you wrote — and that instinct runs through your opposition to universal benefits, green-cost scepticism and belief that people should earn their way forward.

You have moved from The Productive-Market Dissenter to a sharper self-reliance disciplinarian: still market-minded and sceptical of bureaucracy, but now clearly harder-edged on justice and welfare, while constitution has shifted from Centre to Centre-Right. The change is a tightening, not a conversion.

You usually travel with the UK’s majority, including on scrapping non-crime hate incidents, retaining Palestine Action’s proscription and rejecting universal free school meals. Your tension is revealing: you want a more demanding country, yet would not voluntarily join its military and reject the easy moralism of compulsory sacrifice.

Your 103-account circle is right-leaning, and you run with it more often than not. KeenVoter93 is your lockstep ally on defence and other questions; JohnMcLaren is the real fracture line — aligned on elections, but sharply divided over employment and housing, where your self-reliance politics bite hardest.

Your record is already unusually deep, but the open question is whether cultural enforcement or economic self-reliance becomes your defining edge. Ten more votes will sharpen that answer — and every vote makes the picture truer.

You are a clearly right-wing voter whose politics are less about nostalgia than production and choice. Your hardest convictions cluster around employment, housing and energy: let markets build, let competition deliver, and stop subsidising what cannot stand on its own. “Money for nothing corrupts” is close to your governing instinct, but your republican streak and appetite for direct democracy make you an awkward fit for traditional conservatism.

You were The Market-Built Conservative; you are now a sharper market disciplinarian, holding the same architecture while hardening within it on rights, immigration and governance. The new record adds firmer opposition to tax substitution, renewable-first energy and the Online Safety Act, without changing your underlying shape.

You usually vote with the nation, but not passively: you matched the UK majority on 44 of 60 recent votes. You are tougher than the country on borders, single-sex spaces and the Refugee Convention, yet you can join the majority on socially charged questions while dissenting from fashionable regulation and state expansion.

You run with your right-leaning circle more often than not, but not in lockstep: KeenVoter93 is your closest ally, especially on defence, while ChrisBenton is a near-total clash. Your instinct is independent judgement—“competition will force them”—rather than loyalty to any party tribe.

Your open question is whether your market freedom can coexist with the stronger cultural and border enforcement you increasingly demand. Ten more votes will sharpen that tension—and make this living portrait truer with every decision.

You want a harder-edged, self-reliant UK: work should pay without state subsidies, housing should be built, energy should be abundant, and government should enforce rules rather than manage every outcome. Your instinct is distinctly market-liberal — “competition will force them” — but paired with a firm welfare brake, tougher justice and a belief that citizenship should be earned; your republican streak and suspicion of inherited power make you no traditionalist.

You were The Productive-State Dissenter; you have held that constructive right-wing core, but sharpened into a more socially hard-edged market conservative. Welfare, rights and immigration have all moved further right, while your constitutional politics have softened from Centre-Right to Centre: more open to reform, less attached to any settled institutional formula.

You usually travel with the national majority, but your instincts are more disciplined than the public mood: you reject higher benefits, oppose foreign nationals accessing most welfare and resist weakening police powers. The tension is revealing: you side with the country on abolishing inheritance tax and indefinite leave to remain, yet break right from it on welfare and aid — a voter who wants generosity replaced by reciprocity.

You run broadly with your Right-leaning circle, agreeing two times in three, but YvonneKeegan is the real ally: near-lockstep on personnel and the economy, with environment the fault line. ChrisBenton is not a rival influence so much as an opposite pole, with almost no shared political instinct.

Your open question is whether your belief in markets can coexist with the stronger state you demand on borders, punishment and public standards. Ten more votes will sharpen that balance — and make this living picture truer.

You want a UK that rewards work, protects ownership and builds again: cheaper energy, new nuclear, more homes, functioning infrastructure and a welfare system with obligations as well as rights. Your politics are clearly right, but not merely nostalgic or anti-state; you want a more capable state aimed at production, order and national resilience. “Investing is always better than spending” is your governing instinct.

You have moved from The Work-and-Ownership Hardliner into a sharper Productive-State Dissenter: still anchored in work, ownership and energy, but now harder on welfare, rights and justice while more willing to question institutional intent. You have also kept one foot outside the orthodox right, voting against the gold standard and slightly softening on the economy.

You usually move with the national majority, but your reasons are often more severe than the consensus: you backed prison work, equal treatment without religious slaughter exemptions and investment over working-age benefits. The tension is that you distrust government deeply—calling successive administrations an “invader force regime”—yet still expect it to industrialise, secure borders and make the country function.

You run somewhat ahead of your Centre-Right circle rather than simply echoing it. KeenVoter93 is your lockstep ally on defence and other questions, while ChrisBenton is a genuine fault line; your record suggests loyalty to practical outcomes more than to any online tribe.

Your next ten votes will show whether this productive, work-first conservatism becomes disciplined reform or turns further against the institutions you want rebuilt; the picture only gets truer as you keep voting.

You are a clearly right-wing voter with an unusually practical backbone: pro-work, pro-property and hostile to expensive gestures that leave capacity untouched. Your “bare necessities” view of government explains both the tax resistance and the refusal to nationalise water; yet you are not simply anti-state, backing constitutional reform, MPs’ restrictions and a Scottish referendum when institutions lose legitimacy.

You were The Self-Reliance Sovereigntist; you have held that line, but sharpened it into a work-and-ownership hardliner. The newer votes add a telling streak of institutional scepticism: you can side with the left on MPs’ second jobs, monarchy and faith, while moving further right on energy, welfare enforcement and punishment.

You usually travel with the national majority — 44 of 60 recent votes — but your instincts are more disciplined and less sentimental than the crowd’s. You reject easy public ownership and small rescue grants alike, demanding structural fixes: reservoirs, irrigation, productive energy and spending restraint.

You run with your Centre-Right circle more often than not, but not in lockstep. KeenVoter93 is your natural ally on constitutional questions; JohnMcLaren is the useful antagonist, especially where elections and housing expose how fiercely you defend your own model of ownership.

Your open question is whether institutional distrust becomes a full constitutional programme, or remains a brake on wasteful government. Ten more votes will sharpen that boundary — and make the picture truer than any label.

You are solidly right across almost every major fault line, but not merely anti-state: you want a state strong enough to police borders, enforce order and restore accountability, then disciplined enough to stop wasting money. Housing, employment and energy are your deepest convictions, which explains the mix of ownership politics, welfare scepticism and hostility to net-zero mandates; “free, responsible people” should not be treated like livestock in a nanny state.

You were The Productive-Economy Enforcer; you are now the Self-Reliance Sovereigntist. The economic backbone has held, but your impatience has widened into constitutional and institutional distrust — leaving the ECHR, deploying the military at borders, and refusing to let ministers blame distant bodies for domestic failures.

You usually travel with the national majority, yet your instincts are harder-edged than the country’s consensus: firearms for self-defence and military-led border checks place you firmly beyond the mainstream. Your sharpest contradiction is that you can be culturally combative while resisting some easy nationalist answers, including deporting every financially unsupported non-citizen and sending all foreign prisoners abroad.

You run with your Centre-Right circle more often than not, but you are no follower: Froggog is lockstep, while JohnMcLaren is your defining clash, especially on personnel and housing. Your loyalty is to self-reliance and enforcement, not to a faction’s approved script.

Your next ten votes will test whether the constitutional dissenter overtakes the productive-economy enforcer — and every vote will make that answer sharper.

You are clearly right-wing, but your politics are more coherent than merely anti-immigration: work should pay, welfare should not undercut wages, homes should be built by owners rather than the state, and net zero should not strangle production. Your “simple” welfare rule reveals the core belief: government should stop cushioning systems that ought to reward effort.

You were The Productive-Economy Dissenter; you are still holding that line, but now with a sharper constitutional and anti-establishment edge. Recent votes show more willingness to challenge the political settlement itself, while your support for abolishing the monarchy remains an intriguingly left-flavoured break from your otherwise hard-right record.

You usually travel with the national majority, agreeing on 43 of 60 recent votes, but you are more uncompromising on welfare, housing and climate regulation. The UK may accept reform; you want a much more forceful reset—particularly on migration caps, benefits and the economic assumptions behind net zero.

You run with your Centre-Right circle more often than not, agreeing two-thirds of the time. Froggog is pure lockstep, while JohnMcLaren is the productive friction: aligned on elections but sharply divided over personnel and housing, where your instincts are considerably tougher.

Your open question is whether your economic individualism can coexist with the institutional rupture you increasingly favour. Ten more votes will sharpen that tension—and make this living picture truer still.

You are a clearly right-wing voter whose politics begin with productivity: work should pay, homes should be earned rather than endlessly subsidised, and energy policy should not “destroy the UK economy” in pursuit of symbolic virtue. You also want one civil law for everyone, tougher borders and a state confident enough to enforce its rules without becoming paternalistic.

You were The Work-First Market Dissenter; now you are broader and more openly national in your restraint, suspicious not only of welfare dependency but of net zero, weak institutions and political games that override democratic choice. The core has held steady, but the edge has sharpened: economic independence has become a doctrine of national self-preservation.

You usually move with the country rather than against it, but your convictions run harder than the majority on housing, welfare and climate policy. Your revealing contradiction is that you can be severe on immigration and public order while rejecting the easy story that migrants explain everything; on grooming gangs and mass migration, you have sometimes resisted your own side’s preferred answer.

You run broadly with your Centre-Right circle, agreeing two-thirds of the time, but you are not merely following its mood. Froggog is your lockstep ally; JohnMcLaren is the real counterweight, especially on personnel and housing, where your instincts part company sharply.

Your next ten votes will test whether this is finally a settled creed of work, ownership and national restraint—or whether new evidence can still pull you across the old right-left fault lines. Keep voting: the picture gets truer every time, and the next read will sharpen the tension between your hard economic edge and your occasional independence from the right.

You want a UK built around contribution: employment over dependency, ownership over state provision, and affordable energy over grand climate promises. Your rightward politics are unusually practical and material — hardest on welfare, housing and energy — but your scepticism is not tribal: you oppose mass deportation and reject blaming migration for every social failure, insisting that “all humans need to be valued equally.”

You have moved from The Earned-Market Dissenter to The Work-First Market Dissenter: essentially holding steady, but sharpening the edge around migration, community cohesion and institutional trust. You still resist state expansion, yet your recent votes show a firmer appetite for cultural boundaries and a more independent foreign policy.

You usually travel with the national majority, but your reasoning is more controlled than the mood around you: you backed welfare restrictions and an immigration-linked property brake while rejecting simplistic migration explanations. You also joined the country in seeing the cost-of-living crisis as unfinished business, and stood apart from the majority on religious schools, grooming-gang inquiry and independent action over Russian assets.

You sit comfortably among a Centre-Right crowd, agreeing with it two-thirds of the time; Froggog is pure lockstep, while JohnMcLaren is your real counterweight, especially on personnel and housing. You run with your circle on discipline, ownership and borders, but your insistence on evidence — and your suspicion of state power — makes you less reflexive than the average ally.

Your next ten votes will test whether this remains focused self-reliance or hardens into a wider cultural creed; the picture only gets truer each time you vote.

You are solidly right across almost every major fault line, but not as a simple culture-war loyalist. Your politics join welfare restraint, low faith in state spending and hard-headed housing discipline with a strong belief that the UK must defend itself; as you put it, it should become “a tough, impossible to swallow cookie.” You distrust social housing as unfair to people making sacrifices to buy, reject mass council-building, and still refuse to reduce complex crimes to a single migration cause.

A while back, you were The Earned-Home Gatekeeper; now you have become a sharper market disciplinarian and institutional dissenter. The underlying instincts have held, but your recent votes show broader hostility to grand state projects, overseas intervention and regional devolution — alongside a more explicit willingness to challenge fashionable explanations on migration and identity.

You usually move with the national majority, but your reasons are more austere than the country’s: you favour defence spending while rejecting seized Russian assets, and oppose council-house expansion even when most voters support it. Your sharpest tension is that you want order and accountability, yet your distrust sometimes reaches the democratic machinery itself.

You run with your Centre-Right circle more often than not, agreeing on roughly two votes in three. Froggog is effectively lockstep with you, while PaulLondoner is your clear counterweight; the gap suggests your politics are not merely borrowed from your crowd.

Your next ten votes will test whether scepticism hardens into anti-statism or remains a targeted demand for competence, fairness and national purpose. Keep voting: the picture only gets truer, and each ten-vote stretch unlocks a sharper read.

You are a solidly right-wing voter with a practical, disciplinary vision: welfare restrained, migration controlled, public finances brought back under command, and homes treated as places to live rather than assets to inflate. Yet you are not simply anti-state; you back rules that make powerful institutions answerable, from foreign donations to pay discrimination, and your small-boats view is notably about stopping the market and the system behind it, not blaming every migrant.

You were The Fiscal Self-Reliance Enforcer; you are now the Earned-Home Gatekeeper. The old core is intact, but it has widened into a sharper politics of borders, institutional control and merit—while still allowing a few distinctly non-right votes on social care, equal pay and Conservative responsibility.

You usually travel with the national majority, but your instincts are firmer than the country’s on immigration, welfare and authority. The tension is that you can vote for the death penalty and naval interdiction, yet resist crude solutions: gangs, demand and enforcement design matter more to you than slogans.

Your Centre-Right circle is a useful home, not a complete identity: you agree with it often, but FrankGavel73 is your lockstep ally while PaulLondoner is a genuine fault line. You run with the crowd on fiscal restraint and borders, but your democratic streak and suspicion of failed institutions make you less predictable than the average follower.

Your next ten votes will show whether this becomes a fuller anti-state creed or a demand for stricter rules on elites, landlords and public bodies; the picture only gets truer each time you vote.

You are solidly right across almost every policy fault line, but your politics are more practical than tribal: cut the “bribe fund”, control borders, protect property and make the state account for its spending. Your strongest convictions are about work and housing, yet you still defend one-person-one-vote democracy and resist treating unemployment as a civic disqualification.

You were The Work-and-Property Disciplinarian; you are holding that core identity, but sharpening it into a broader fiscal and institutional enforcer. Recent votes make you more hostile to rent controls, university expansion and fossil-fuel windfalls, while your support for referendums shows the disciplinarian still has a democratic streak.

You are not simply following the national mood: across the recent record, you have sided with the UK majority about as often as you have opposed it. You join the country on welfare cuts and debt, but break with it on rent regulation, migration and the instinct to make government intervene in housing.

You run with your Centre-Right circle more often than not, especially alongside CGX, where governance and constitutional questions put you in near-lockstep. PaulLondoner is the sharp reverse image: the clash suggests your instincts on authority, responsibility and the proper limits of the state are unusually hard-edged even among your own crowd.

The open question is whether your self-reliance politics can make room for collective provision when markets fail; your next ten votes will test that boundary. Keep voting: this picture sharpens with every choice, and the next read will show whether the enforcer becomes more libertarian, more populist or simply more exacting.

You are a strongly right-wing voter with unusually hard convictions about employment and housing: less benefit dependence, fewer planning constraints, more room for owners and builders, and no blank cheque for government. Your politics are strict but not simply punitive — voting against voiding the jobless vote and for a codified constitution reveals a stubborn belief in individual rights, even when you distrust the institutions meant to protect them.

A while back, you were The Ironclad Workfare Constitutionalist; now you are The Work-and-Property Disciplinarian. The underlying worldview has held firm, but it has sharpened around ownership, migration and fiscal discipline — rejecting first-time-buyer restrictions, demanding benefit legitimacy and insisting the state should spend “a lot less”; your hesitation over difficult social-care reform is the tension still showing through.

You usually travel with the UK's majority, but your dissent is revealing: you resist social-care expansion, stronger Ukraine support and climate-development priorities even when the country leans that way. You are not merely anti-government; you want government that enforces borders, balances books and protects liberty without turning every problem into a new programme.

You run to the right of your Centre-Right circle rather than simply following it. CGX is your closest ally, especially on welfare and health; PaulLondoner is your sharpest clash, suggesting your order-first instincts are personal rather than tribal.

Your next ten votes will test whether autonomy or enforcement is the final master of your politics — and each vote will make this rare, sharply drawn picture truer.

You are an emphatically right-wing voter whose politics run on self-reliance: benefits conditioned, migration limited, spending restrained and rules enforced without apology. But this is not simple punishment politics—you protect the triple lock, reject demolishing old homes and resist turning every social question into a state crusade; your instinct is discipline with boundaries.

You were The Self-Reliance Enforcer; now you have become The Ironclad Workfare Constitutionalist, holding steady but sharper on national identity, institutional distrust and consequences for serious offenders. “End benefit bonanza” captures the harder edge, while your refusal to abolish the EHRC and your rejection of a traditional-values media campaign show that your conservatism still has limits.

You usually travel with the UK’s majority, but your convictions are more settled than the public mood: immigration restriction, tax restraint, criminal disqualification and opposition to devolving Westminster’s money all come naturally. Your sharpest contradiction is backing easier housebuilding while arguing that mass immigration and state intervention are what have distorted housing in the first place.

You run broadly with your Centre-Right circle, especially CGX, where welfare and health bring you close. BoldTally25 is the real fault line: economy and rights expose a voter who is less willing than your allies to trade personal autonomy for their preferred solution.

Your open question is whether this work-and-order constitution can keep defending pensions, households and practical public services as the demands for restraint intensify. Ten more votes will sharpen the answer—and every ballot makes the picture of your political instincts truer.

You want a UK that protects its borders, rewards work, keeps spending and borrowing under control, and restores confidence in authority. Your politics are unusually consistent on welfare, tax, education, crime and national sovereignty, but not crudely punitive: you defend the pension triple lock, reject making prisoners pay, and oppose demolishing old homes when renovation will do. “Duty” is your word for border control; “until we build our nuclear” is your answer to energy realism.

The Precision Hardliner has become the Self-Reliance Enforcer: the old exactness remains, but the newer record is more openly fiscal, border-conscious and hostile to state overreach. You have sharpened the welfare brake and defence instinct while keeping the same unexpected limits — no blanket death-penalty politics, no wealth-tax cure-all, and no easy surrender of protections for ordinary households.

You usually run with the national majority, yet your instincts are firmer than the country’s on taxes, migration, gender medicine, union power and public order. The tension is that your rightward politics are not simply anti-state: you want a capable NHS, basic education standards and secure pensions, not government stripped to the bone.

You sit to the right of your Centre-Right circle, agreeing most naturally with CGX on welfare and health, while BoldTally25 is your clearest intellectual collision. You run with your crowd more than against it, but your sharper sovereignty-and-discipline edge makes you less accommodating than the average follower.

Your next ten votes will test whether this becomes a settled law-and-work creed or keeps producing carefully drawn exceptions; the picture only gets truer every time you vote.

You want a leaner, harder Britain — drilling approved, fracking allowed, benefits capped and worked for, wokeness named as the enemy — but you don't want cruelty for its own sake: you rejected the general death penalty and full welfare-tax integration, wanting a floor ("Maximum benefits per household... not greater than minimum UK salary") not a cage.

Last time you were the Sovereign Heretic, straining against every cage — ECHR, net zero, the quango state. That instinct hasn't cooled, but it's sharpened into something more surgical: you now carve precise exceptions (death for child abusers specifically, not crime generally) rather than demanding blanket abolition of restraint.

You split almost evenly with the country — siding with the majority on barely half your recent votes — which makes you less a reflexive contrarian than a genuine swing vote the mainstream can't take for granted, backing the nation on policing equality and PIP reform while rejecting its instincts on devolution and tuition fees.

You run with flash58 in lockstep on rights and governance, but ChrisBenton is nearly a mirror-opposite — you agree barely one time in eight, a reminder that your circle isn't the echo chamber it looks like from the outside.

Your PIP and NHS-reform votes suggest a soft spot your circle hasn't found yet — vote on, and next week's read will know exactly where it sits.

You're voting for a country that owns its own steel, its own borders, its own courts — sovereign first, comfortable second. Rights, environment and education are your most settled convictions, all pushed unanimously rightward, and your written opinions make the logic plain: on nationalising steel you'd rather government "created environment to make production... profitable again" than take the asset — control through incentive, not ownership.

You've come a long way from the Direct-Democracy Hardliner — that anti-party, burn-it-down streak is still visible (Lords reform, forced by-elections on defectors), but it's been absorbed into something more coherent: a sovereigntist right-winger who's traded pure institutional rage for a clear program on borders, defence and law.

You split almost exactly down the middle with the country — siding with the majority on barely half your recent votes — which isn't contrarianism, it's that Britain itself is oddly split on your causes: leaving the ECHR, scrapping net zero, reviving the death penalty all only just carried the nation, while you carried them with conviction.

You run near-identical to StoicDendrite, lockstep across every shared vote, but ChrisBenton is nearly a different species — agreement barely one vote in ten — suggesting your circle isn't one bloc but two camps you've chosen to sit between.

This is a live read — cast your next vote and the picture sharpens again next week. The open thread worth watching: does that old anti-establishment streak survive contact with your new hard-right conviction, or finally dissolve into it?

You vote for a leaner Britain: PIP tightened, rent controls rejected, care service kept out of general taxation, spatial strategies binned before they start. This isn't just fiscal caution — you want power stripped back to the individual and the local, distrustful of anything that looks like a bureaucracy building itself a mandate.

Last week you were the Undecided Egalitarian, split near evenly with the nation and wary of concentrated wealth. That hedge is gone. Across 66 scored votes you've hardened into a clear right-winger — unanimous on housing, rights, environment — though your own words ("parties should be banned... direct democracy") show the anti-establishment streak survived the shift; it's just found a harder edge.

You split almost evenly with the national majority — 17 of 30 — but the disagreements are pointed: you rejected devolution, facial-recognition safeguards, and the 10-Year Health Plan that most of the country backed comfortably, while agreeing with the crowd on nuclear defence and net zero repeal.

You've never voted on international affairs, technology, science or agriculture — a right-leaning profile this firm shouldn't have that much white space, especially given how sharp your instincts are on spending and sovereignty elsewhere.

This read sharpens with every vote — fill in defence-abroad and technology and we'll see whether your anti-concentration streak still bites when the target isn't Westminster but Silicon Valley or NATO. Come back next week; the picture only gets truer.

You want a Britain that checks power wherever it sits — you'll vote against billionaire wealth concentration in one breath and against unconditional welfare payments staying untouched in another. It's not incoherence, it's a consistent instinct: don't let anyone, state or plutocrat, coast unaccountably.

You split almost exactly down the middle with the national mood — siding with the majority barely half the time. On Ukraine and the £13.5bn defence plan you broke from a nation that leaned supportive; on reindustrialisation and the NHS question you went your own way too. You're not a contrarian by design, just someone who checks each question against its own merits rather than a party script.

No local data has come through yet on your votes — for now, Britain is the only mirror you've got, and an early one at that.

Thirteen scored votes across just two real categories with signal — economy and welfare carry the weight so far, while crime, health, education, energy and a dozen others sit untouched. Housing and rights each got a single unanimous-right vote (Cambridge planning controls) — worth testing whether that holds as a pattern or was a one-off local grumble.

This is early days — a shape, not yet a portrait. Cast a few more votes on health, crime or the constitution and the picture sharpens fast; every vote you make rewrites this profile, so come back and see who you've become.