From a few conversations with him, I think he semi-identifies as an EA. He’s definitely known about EA for a while, there is evidence for that (just search his name in the EA Forum search).
I think he would admit that he doesn’t fully agree with EAs on many issues. I think that most EAs I know wouldn’t exactly classify him as an EA if they were to know him, but as EA-adjacent.
He definitely knows far more about it than most politicians.
I would trust that he would use “evidence-based reasoning”. I’m sure he has for DXE. However, “evidence-based reasoning” by itself is a pretty basic claim at this point. It’s almost meaningless at this stage, I think all politicians can claim this.
From a few conversations with him, I think he semi-identifies as an EA. He’s definitely known about EA for a while, there is evidence for that (just search his name in the EA Forum search).
I think he would admit that he doesn’t fully agree with EAs on many issues. I think that most EAs I know wouldn’t exactly classify him as an EA if they were to know him, but as EA-adjacent.
He definitely knows far more about it than most politicians.
I would trust that he would use “evidence-based reasoning”. I’m sure he has for DXE. However, “evidence-based reasoning” by itself is a pretty basic claim at this point. It’s almost meaningless at this stage, I think all politicians can claim this.