> For actual fascists, it's an indication that he's will support them, and that they should support him.
What actual fascists? That is not a large population segment in modern day. And support for what? He's not running for anything.
> the denial provides them the chance to spill gallons on ink on speculating about his state of mind
The theory is then that he made that hand gesture on purpose, intending to deny it.
Opponents would (as you do) disbelieve any denial and then try to use it against him, which is a significant cost. In exchange for this he would be trying to shore up support among the a) far smaller group of actual fascists who b) were previously on the fence and c) would not remain on the fence even though denying the gesture would be sending mixed signals.
There is no gain from doing that. It's why opponents are the ones talking about it. If doing that was actually to his benefit then opponents would want to be silent about it because publicizing it would be helping him to court the hypothetical large group of fascists who would look favorably on it.
> When someone does one thing, but says another, believe what they do, not what they say.
That's kind of the point. Hand gestures are in the category of saying something rather than doing something.
> There's no ambiguity in this symbol, or what it represents.
The obvious problem here is that the Nazis used "raising your hand" as a symbol.
The most plausible argument that he did it on purpose would be as a troll. Which isn't completely out of character for him, but it still has all of the same negative consequences above with the unambiguous implication of "not worth it".
What I have yet to see whatsoever is any evidence that he supports genocide, internment camps, incarceration without due process or the like. These are the things that make the bad guys the bad guys, not some kind of 5-D chess dog whistle rubbish.
What actual fascists? That is not a large population segment in modern day. And support for what? He's not running for anything.
> the denial provides them the chance to spill gallons on ink on speculating about his state of mind
The theory is then that he made that hand gesture on purpose, intending to deny it.
Opponents would (as you do) disbelieve any denial and then try to use it against him, which is a significant cost. In exchange for this he would be trying to shore up support among the a) far smaller group of actual fascists who b) were previously on the fence and c) would not remain on the fence even though denying the gesture would be sending mixed signals.
There is no gain from doing that. It's why opponents are the ones talking about it. If doing that was actually to his benefit then opponents would want to be silent about it because publicizing it would be helping him to court the hypothetical large group of fascists who would look favorably on it.
> When someone does one thing, but says another, believe what they do, not what they say.
That's kind of the point. Hand gestures are in the category of saying something rather than doing something.
> There's no ambiguity in this symbol, or what it represents.
The obvious problem here is that the Nazis used "raising your hand" as a symbol.
The most plausible argument that he did it on purpose would be as a troll. Which isn't completely out of character for him, but it still has all of the same negative consequences above with the unambiguous implication of "not worth it".
What I have yet to see whatsoever is any evidence that he supports genocide, internment camps, incarceration without due process or the like. These are the things that make the bad guys the bad guys, not some kind of 5-D chess dog whistle rubbish.