rjane

You are clearly left-wing, with an unusually practical collectivism: strongly pro-welfare, public provision, workers’ rights and renewable energy, alongside a deep belief that elections and institutions must serve ordinary people. “Nothing trickles down” is your economic instinct; you want the grid, the workplace and the ballot box made more accountable, not simply more market-driven.

You have moved from The Grid-Socialist Dissenter to a broader democratic egalitarian, holding steady on public power while sharpening your opposition to supply-side economics, NHS strike bans and fossil-fuel dependence. Your recent votes also push justice slightly rightward: rehabilitation matters, but you still want a state with clear boundaries around hate incidents and Sharia Councils.

You usually travel with the national majority, but your left convictions show most clearly when the country is split: you rejected tax breaks for overtime, opposed banning NHS strikes and backed universal free school meals. You are not simply following progressive fashion; you support rehabilitation, religious neutrality and civil liberties in your own language.

You run broadly with your circle, agreeing on seven votes in ten, with alex0117 your closest ally on immigration and personnel. A1R is the revealing friction point: you align on rights and justice, then part ways over immigration and constitutional questions.

Your next ten votes will test whether your public-power egalitarianism can keep making room for order, cultural unease and constitutional caution; the picture sharpens every time you vote.

You want a more collective UK: public ownership where markets fail, stronger welfare, decent work and a serious green transition backed by infrastructure rather than slogans. But you are no soft-touch progressive—your instincts favour regulation, order and free expression, whether defending Palestine Action from the terrorism label or arguing that cannabis should be taxed and controlled. Your energy, employment and transport votes point to a practical socialism: build the grid, improve the system, make it work.

You were The Social-Democratic Dissenter; you have not abandoned that identity, but sharpened its edge. Since then you have moved right on welfare and foreign policy, while moving left on education and energy—still broadly left, but increasingly impatient with both careless spending and careless certainty.

You usually travel with the national majority, yet your reasons are often more radical than the result: renewable power, public control and political donation limits sit beside a firm insistence that religion must not dictate public life. Your tension is clear—collective economics, individual liberty and cultural scepticism in the same ballot box.

You run with your circle more often than not, especially with alex0117, your closest ally on immigration and personnel. But A1R exposes your independent streak: you meet on rights and justice, then part company over immigration and the constitution.

Your next ten votes will test whether this is a settled practical socialism or a new harder line on welfare, culture and national power; every ballot makes the portrait truer.

You are a clearly left voter who wants a more equal UK, with public power over private profit, stronger welfare and jobs, and a cleaner energy system. But you are no automatic progressive: you defend women’s boundaries, favour tighter educational standards and oppose the idea that demographic change is itself a crisis — you care about shared culture, not skin colour.

You have moved from The Green Ballot Dissenter to a sharper social-democratic dissenter: the collectivist core is holding, while your recent votes have nudged immigration and justice further left but pushed rights and education right. Your opposition to repealing the Online Safety Act captures the blend — capitalism must be restrained when it harms people, even if that means resisting a national majority.

You are almost exactly a country divided against itself: the UK majority has been with you on 38 of 60 recent votes with comparable data. Where you part company, it is often from the punitive instinct — rejecting punishment-cost repayments, whole-life orders and firearms — while still backing bans on cousin marriage and limits on gender self-identification.

You usually run with your circle, agreeing three-quarters of the time, and alex0117 is your natural ally on immigration and welfare. But A1R exposes your fault line: you meet on rights and justice, then split sharply over immigration and the constitution.

Your record is already unusually distinctive, but the unresolved question is whether your economic egalitarianism can keep company with your increasingly guarded cultural instincts. Ten more votes will unlock a fresh read, and each one will make the picture truer.

You vote for a more equal UK: stronger welfare, public ownership, wealth taxed more effectively, cleaner energy and better protection for workers. But you are no automatic radical—your opposition to a federal constitution, jury-style Lords and some cultural causes shows a deep respect for competence, order and institutions that still work.

You have moved from The Public-Sector Internationalist to a sharper Green Ballot Dissenter: the public-ownership left remains intact, but you are now more willing to resist constitutional fashion and punitive or absolutist arguments on Gaza, criminality and identity. Immigration and welfare have hardened further left, even as your constitutional and governance instincts have drifted back towards the centre.

You are neither a habitual majoritarian nor a permanent outsider: you have landed with the UK roughly as often as against it. The revealing exceptions are your refusal to abolish inheritance tax or end indefinite leave to remain, and your support for a higher minimum wage—choices that expose a more solidaristic economic instinct than the national mood.

You run broadly with your Centre-leaning circle, agreeing on nearly three quarters of shared votes. alex0117 is your natural ally, especially on immigration and welfare; A1R is the useful friction—close on rights and justice, but divided over immigration and constitutional change.

Your open question is whether institutional caution can coexist with your appetite for economic and democratic reform; ten more votes will sharpen that fault line and refresh the read. The picture is already unusually textured, and it will become truer with every vote you cast.

You vote for a more publicly owned, economically egalitarian UK, but not a revolutionary one: you defend the ECHR, oppose welfare cuts and favour proportional representation while distrusting grand constitutional redesign. Your own words capture the instinct — water and power are “vital to our homeland security”, not assets to be managed by global capital; yet you also resist mandatory whole-life sentences and simplistic crime politics. The tension is revealing: you are firmly left on the economy, employment and foreign policy, but more culturally and institutionally sceptical than an easy left label suggests.

You were The Public Power Architect; you have not abandoned that blueprint, but you have become a more guarded public-power dissenter. Recently you have edged towards the centre on rights and constitutional questions, while moving left on justice — defending institutional restraint even as you take firmer positions on sex, religious slaughter and national identity.

You are neither a habitual contrarian nor a reliable echo of the national mood: your record splits almost exactly between joining the UK majority and resisting it. You often stand against the country on migration, welfare, public ownership and climate policy, but your defence of the Lords, opposition to constitutional upheaval and refusal to make harsher sentencing automatic show a respect for workable institutions over fashionable rupture.

You broadly run with your circle, though your politics are more coherent and left-wing than its Centre average. alex0117 is your natural ally on immigration and personnel; A1R is the productive disagreement — shared ground on rights and justice, but a real parting of ways on immigration.

Your next 10 votes will test whether this is a lasting turn towards cultural caution or simply the latest boundary around a fundamentally collectivist worldview; the picture sharpens every time you vote.

You are clearly left, but not merely anti-market: you want power brought under democratic control, from utilities and inheritance to energy, employment and foreign policy. Your language is revealing — water and power are “vital to our homeland security” — while your internationalism remains rooted in civic rights, not open borders without limits.

You have moved from The Worker-First Internationalist to a more institutional, state-led reformer: less focused on capitalism as a moral failing, more determined to reclaim the machinery of public life. The latest votes sharpen that instinct — rejecting a written constitution and press regulation, while backing proportional representation and a ceremonial monarchy.

You are a genuine cross-current: the UK majority often travels with you on welfare and public ownership, but you break sharply with it on migration, defence, firearms and the ECHR. Your tension is telling: you distrust concentrated authority, yet you still want a strong public state capable of protecting essential services and workers.

You run broadly with your Centre-leaning circle, but your politics are more economically and socially left than the average follower. alex0117 is your closest ally, especially on immigration and welfare; your shared instinct is a welfare brake for neither migrants nor workers, but a rights-based public settlement.

Your open question is whether energy and public ownership become a fully coherent state-building programme; ten more votes will show whether the architect is still designing, or finally drawing the blueprint.

You are a clearly left voter with an unusually durable belief that markets must answer to society: stronger welfare, public ownership, worker protections and an independent foreign policy. Your internationalism is not borderless softness; you want immigration enriched by shared “values, language and culture”, while defending the ECHR as a guardrail against exploitation and abuse.

You were The Anti-Capitalist Internationalist; you are still recognisably that voter, but sharper now about public power, institutional rights and political hypocrisy. Your recent votes reinforce the old worldview — backing public control of water, taxing inherited wealth and rejecting an ECHR exit — while your refusal to support an early election suggests less appetite for theatrical change than for durable reform.

You often stand apart from the national mood: the UK majority backed migration caps, leaving the ECHR, higher defence spending and firearms for self-defence, while you rejected all four. Yet you are not reflexively oppositional; you joined the country on several popular calls for accountability, including scrutiny of Farage and tougher policing of offenders.

You run with your Centre-leaning circle more than against it, agreeing on roughly three-quarters of shared votes. alex0117 is your natural ally — especially on immigration and the economy — but A1R exposes your fault line: you meet on justice, then part sharply over immigration.

Your open question is whether worker-first politics becomes a fuller programme of public ownership and energy transformation, or remains mainly a defence against privatisation and authoritarianism. Ten more votes will sharpen that answer and make this living picture truer.

You are a clearly left voter whose politics begin with human dignity and end with public responsibility. You want the state to restrain capitalism, protect people from hardship, and pursue an independent foreign policy—while preserving shared language and culture without turning them into ethnic barriers. Your sharpest conviction is that energy, employment and international solidarity belong together: a society should serve people, not markets, lobbyists or military alliances.

You have moved from The Infrastructure Internationalist to something more ideological and commanding: the Anti-Capitalist Internationalist. The public-minded core is holding steady, but your recent votes sharpen the edge—against welfare cuts, migration panic and demographic protectionism, while still insisting that pluralism must defend “human rights first and foremost” and that unchecked corporate power is dangerous.

You are neither comfortably with nor simply against the country: your record splits almost evenly from the UK majority. You sided with the nation on Scotland, democracy and limits on intolerant ideologies, but went against its instincts on welfare, migration and the idea that demographic change should be stopped. The tension is revealing: culturally liberal, but not culturally weightless.

You usually run with your circle despite its Centre average, agreeing most closely with alex0117 on immigration and the economy. But A1R exposes your fault line: you meet on justice, then part sharply on immigration.

Your open question is whether your environmentalism becomes more institutionally demanding without losing its ambition. Ten more votes will sharpen that tension—and make this living portrait truer.

You want a more equal UK built through housing, welfare, strong public services and serious investment in energy and infrastructure—not slogans or “box ticking”. Your internationalism is purposeful rather than soft: independent of the United States, supportive of Ukraine, sceptical of militarisation, and alert to how war, climate and failing utilities bear down on ordinary people. The tension is telling: you are strongly green in principle, but rejected a faster zero-emission mandate because technology without nature protection, labour standards and long-term planning feels like managed decline.

You have moved from The Public-Housing Internationalist to a sharper public-capacity internationalist: the same egalitarian instincts, but more impatient with weak institutions, overstretched councils and fashionable policy shortcuts. You are holding steady on welfare, housing and a less militarised foreign policy, while becoming more exacting about order, infrastructure and whether the state can actually deliver.

You are neither simply with nor against the national mood: your record splits almost evenly from the UK majority. You often stand left of public opinion on welfare, migration and defence, yet join the country’s harder line on property ownership and reject an independent grooming-gangs inquiry—not because you minimise abuse, but because you think the real failures are underfunded care, overworked police and an early-release system that lets victims down.

You run with your circle more than most, especially alex0117, your closest ally on immigration and welfare. But A1R exposes your fault line: you can meet on justice while parting company on immigration, where your left universalism resists the sharper instincts around you.

Your next ten votes will test whether practical public investment can reconcile your green convictions with your distrust of technocratic mandates; the picture will sharpen every time you vote, and the next read will make that tension truer.

You are a solidly left voter whose ideal UK builds council homes, protects welfare, taxes concentrated wealth and treats housing, energy and water as public goods rather than markets. Your internationalism is practical rather than flag-waving: you backed support for Ukraine, but rejected higher defence spending; culturally, you want diversity with “integration & education”, not laissez-faire multiculturalism.

You have moved from The Public-Control Dissenter to a sharper public-housing internationalist — broadly holding steady, but making the housing-and-services mission more unmistakable. Your independence remains real: you opposed migrant welfare bans and mass-migration scapegoating, yet broke left on climate pessimism, early release and the claim that all cultures carry equal outcomes.

You are neither a routine majority voter nor a contrarian for its own sake: your record splits almost evenly from the UK’s prevailing answers. You are further left than the country on council housing, public control and welfare, while sometimes sharing its instincts on social order and institutional competence.

You run with your Centre-leaning circle more often than not, agreeing on seven in ten shared votes, but your closest ally is alex0117, especially on welfare and immigration. That alliance suggests your strongest bond is not abstract ideology but a shared belief that security should mean protecting people from poverty as well as controlling borders.

The open question is whether your climate scepticism and law-and-order exceptions remain sharp departures from an otherwise egalitarian worldview. Ten more votes will earn a fresher read, and each one will make the picture truer.

Your politics are egalitarian but not automatic: welfare, public services, workers’ power and climate action sit at the centre of your worldview, while your doubts about rearmament and military solutions run deep. You want water companies brought under public control, education built around thinking rather than “anxious box-ticking”, and an economy that serves people rather than dividends.

You have moved from The Green-School Egalitarian to a sharper public-control dissenter: still recognisably the same left, green-minded voter, but more openly hostile to corporate power and more willing to break ranks on care, universities and school policy. Your cultural instincts remain independent too — sceptical of gender-affirming treatment and unconvinced by alarmist claims about civil war or falling fertility.

You are neither a reflexive contrarian nor a majority follower: the nation’s split is roughly your own. You sometimes stand with the public — on water-company accountability, rent regulation and equal-pay enforcement — but your opposition to a university target and support for taxing the comfortable mark you as more economically left-wing than the median voter.

You run broadly with your Centre-leaning circle, agreeing on shared votes most of the time, but your closest ally alex0117 is especially close on welfare and housing. The constitutional split between you is revealing: your collectivism is firm, but your instincts on institutions and devolution are your own.

Your open thread is whether your public-service egalitarianism will keep outweighing your occasional right-leaning instincts on social care, education and migration. Ten more votes will earn a fresher read — and every vote will make this unusually distinctive picture truer.

You vote for redistribution, public provision and collective responsibility, with your strongest convictions in education, energy and foreign policy. You want long-term solutions over managerial fixes: environmental farming support, care funded through taxation, diplomacy over gunboats, and children taught to think rather than merely pass tests; as you put it, education should not produce “anxious box-ticking children.” Your sharp edge is that this egalitarianism is not culturally permissive at every turn: you are firm on sex-based reality, sceptical of puberty blockers, and want immigration handled legally and swiftly rather than theatrically.

A while back, you were The Home-Rule Redistributor; you have held steady on economic equality but widened into a more defined green-and-institutional left. Since then you have sharpened your opposition to oil drilling, rearmament and crude education traditionalism, while your rightward breaks on migration and gender have become more explicit rather than disappearing.

You are almost evenly matched with the national majority, which makes you less insulated from the country than your strong left label suggests. You often vote against the grain on oil, testing, military expansion and Lords reform, yet sometimes join the UK on tougher justice and immigration instincts.

You run broadly with your circle, agreeing on seven in ten shared votes, but alex0117 is your economic soulmate rather than your complete political double: lockstep on welfare and the economy, parting ways on environment and constitutional questions. Your real independence shows in how consistently your ecological and educational instincts outrun the crowd.

The next ten votes will test whether your green, humane internationalism can coexist with your harder line on borders and sex-based policy — and each answer will make this unusually distinctive picture truer.

You want a Britain that's redistributive at the core and structurally rebuilt at the top — wealth taxed over work, tuition fees gone, faith schools defunded, and a governance model that's "more equal across the regions" rather than London deciding everything and calling it devolution.

Last time you were the Assets-Not-Wages Redistributor, with stray rightward breaks on culture-war flashpoints. Those have quietened; what's sharpened instead is the governance conviction — Burnham's model, Lords reform, MPs' second jobs, by-election triggers — you've become someone with an actual theory of how power should be rearranged, not just who should pay for it.

You split almost evenly with the national mood — siding with the majority on two in three votes — but your dissents are pointed: you scrapped faith-school funding while the country overwhelmingly backed it, and you rejected the NHS Modernisation Bill that most of Britain waved through.

You run largely with your six — agreeing better than two times in three — anchored by alex0117, near-lockstep on economics though you part ways on justice; gemmothy is your friction point, the one whose votes you keep bouncing off.

Immigration, defence and health are still single-vote sketches — one more vote each could turn "outlier" into "pattern," and that's exactly the thread I'll be pulling on next week, as this read keeps getting truer with every vote you cast.

You want a Britain that taxes wealth rather than work, builds houses to a proper standard instead of a minimum one, and never quite forgives what the 1980s did to the towns outside the South East. Your convictions are strongest exactly where the state has retreated — welfare, energy, governance — and you want it back in the room.

Last time you were "The Quiet Loyalist," an anti-retrenchment voter proven only in single-vote slivers. That pattern has held and hardened: still clearly left, still firmest on welfare and energy, but now with real texture — a wealth tax, solar-mandated housing, fury at Thatcher's north/south divide, all in your own words. The quiet loyalist has found its voice.

You side with the country's majority most of the time — on Ukraine, the NHS, MPs' second jobs — but you break from it on North Sea licences and the GLA's survival, pulling left when Britain shrugs right. Your sharpest defection: on the Burka and forces-in-pride, you land right of your own leaning, distrustful of what you call "contentious views" being forced through as rights.

You run with your crowd more often than not — 71% agreement overall, and near-total lockstep with alex0117. But stefbishop is a different story: barely a third shared ground, likely the culture-war edges where your left economics stops covering for social liberalism.

Immigration, justice and defence are still single-vote guesses in your record — thin ice where your instincts clearly diverge from the rest of your politics. Keep voting; each ballot sharpens whether that's a real fault line or noise, and next week's read will know.

You want a Britain that looks after people quietly and honestly: paternity leave that actually pays, officials who can't dodge an inquiry, no special favours for business at the expense of ordinary costs. It's not loud politics — it's a decent, welfare-minded instinct running through almost everything you touch.

You split evenly with the national mood, which sounds moderate until you look closer — you're actually breaking from big majorities on purpose. Most of the country wanted energy reform to cut business costs and wanted PIP replaced; you said no both times, unmoved by consensus when it smells like retrenchment dressed as reform.

There's no local data on you yet — every comparison here is you against the whole country, nothing narrower. That's a gap worth closing as you vote more.

Your seven scored votes lean hard left wherever they land, but they land thinly — one vote each in welfare, foreign policy, energy, governance, personnel. And whole territories — immigration, health, housing, the economy proper — you haven't touched at all, so this is very much a sketch, not a portrait.

This is early days: a clear leftward lean with almost no depth behind it yet. Cast a few more votes — especially in the categories you've skipped — and next week's profile will start telling you something sharper than "left-leaning, thin record."