The political spectrum should actually be three dimensions. Each dimension is moderately mutually exclusive. In Euclidean space, by contrast, all dimensions are fully mutually exclusive.
The first dimension replaces "left vs right" with "guile/liar vs honor/honest". The second dimension replaces "forward vs back" with "revolutionary/progressive vs conservative/regressive". The third dimension replaces "up vs down" with "libertarian/anarchist vs authoritarian/fascist".
The three dimensions describe relationship to truth, time and authority.
Who actually identifies as guile/liar? Well, they lie about it, naturally. But you can tell by the way they emphasize the care-harm moral dimension, without regard for honor or objective truth. Women and Democrats agree on this, which is why they feel the envy of the undeserving is legitimate cause for redistribution -- so long as it comes from someone else's pocket.
So, I'd describe myself as an extreme honor, reactionary revolutionary, theocratic libertarian.
Obviously I don't always consistently favor one side of a dimension. For example, on the time dimension, I favor both a return to ancient Biblical institutes and also certain revolutionary technological innovations, such as cryptocurrency. There's little I would conserve of the present, so I occupy the two extremes of the axis, depending on the issue.
One's political beliefs change over time. One's phenotype, however, is fixed. Thus it's also helpful to identify one's position in CSR space. This is best pictured as a 2d plot divided into three equal sections, meeting at the origin. If one is on the border of two of the sections, then one is opposite to the third.
I am a competitor with stress tolerator secondary.