Would you mind explaining why you think this is a weak connection? If someone said "there's this guy, Hitler, who has written about some of these things..." in support of their political vision, it would be reasonable to conclude that Hitler has noticeable influence on their political views
> in support of their political vision See my next tweet - he's specifically saying he disagrees with Yarvin.
(totally reasonable to think "The VP should not know who Yarvin is", but we also all know who Yarvin is...)
I suppose you could argue that this isn't conclusive evidence that Hitler in this analogy is *central* to that person's views, but has OP asserted Yarvin was likewise *central* to Vance's views?
Further, even if Yarvin is not *central* to Vance's views, the fact that Vance has both horrifying political beliefs and also cited Yarvin as an inspiration for those views is strong evidence of how terrible Vance is