Generalist working across animal advocacy, AI safety and artificial sentience. Previously organised conferences for Sentient Futures, now doing ops and comms for CaML. Background in philosophy.
Thanks for you comment Vasco, and appreciate your concerns about the methodological validity. I'm likely to take more of a lead on producing these surveys in future, and will be thinking about how to give the questions the right amount of specificity. You're right though that it's possible that there's going to be trade-offs between added clarification and accessibility.
Thanks Zuzana! I'm going to have a think about whether there can be a more concerted effort for the podcast idea.
I take your point about the international situation potentially making interventions more difficult. To be honest, I don't really see animal welfare being a headline political cause – I imagine it's more likely that it will be more successful if solutions are sought through manifesto small-print/ technocratic solutions (which may actually be better for avoiding the controversy/ polarisation that might come with this animal welfare as a more central manifesto position). In this sense, I'd hope that the chaotic international situation wouldn't be too much of a barrier.
I agree heavily with this sentiment, with a possible addendum – I imagine it could still be possible to have an issue-based coalition that attempts to lobby parties but is not seen as endorsing any parties specifically. In this sense, you could still attempt to lobby Reform as a single-issue coalition, although this strategy might be more aggressive/ gain less traction than simply tacking onto Your Party which is generally more value-aligned.
This is an interesting point! I agree with Ben that a Conservative-Reform coalition is very possible though, particularly if Reform do anywhere near as well in the next election as they have done in polls thus far. I'd imagine the chances of a hung parliament are currently pretty high.
Thanks for you comment Vasco, and appreciate your concerns about the methodological validity. I'm likely to take more of a lead on producing these surveys in future, and will be thinking about how to give the questions the right amount of specificity. You're right though that it's possible that there's going to be trade-offs between added clarification and accessibility.
No worries! I've included the average LTR now :)
Hi Jordan, thanks for the feedback! Just to clarify, as I could interpret this in a few ways. Do you mean:
Thanks Zuzana! I'm going to have a think about whether there can be a more concerted effort for the podcast idea.
I take your point about the international situation potentially making interventions more difficult. To be honest, I don't really see animal welfare being a headline political cause – I imagine it's more likely that it will be more successful if solutions are sought through manifesto small-print/ technocratic solutions (which may actually be better for avoiding the controversy/ polarisation that might come with this animal welfare as a more central manifesto position). In this sense, I'd hope that the chaotic international situation wouldn't be too much of a barrier.
Hope to see you at the mass lobby day!
I agree heavily with this sentiment, with a possible addendum – I imagine it could still be possible to have an issue-based coalition that attempts to lobby parties but is not seen as endorsing any parties specifically. In this sense, you could still attempt to lobby Reform as a single-issue coalition, although this strategy might be more aggressive/ gain less traction than simply tacking onto Your Party which is generally more value-aligned.
This is an interesting point! I agree with Ben that a Conservative-Reform coalition is very possible though, particularly if Reform do anywhere near as well in the next election as they have done in polls thus far. I'd imagine the chances of a hung parliament are currently pretty high.