I think this is more of the "with us or against us" mentality. I'm definitely not on right yet I'm sticking up for them a lot lately because because all "the left" is doing is yelling at people about racism and misogyny, not to mention a lot of other crazy stuff like cultural appropriation.
Not to mention, a lot of the "alt right" is not particularly right wing at all, some (like protectionism) is even left wing.
Alt-right is just a meaningless catch-all term to describe someone who is sarcastic and "not-liberal."
Unfortunately, this isn't true. There definitely is movement afoot on the right side of the spectrum that distinguishes itself from the standard U.S. "conservative" camp of roughly the mid-1960s to present in many disturbing ways (open and enthusiastic embrace of race-baiting techniques, climate change denialism, and an abdiding belief that political correctness is basically the greatest threat that humanity has ever faced) that many traditional conservatives actually find quite ridiculous and/or outright repugnant.
The WP entry may not be the best, but for further research here are two fairly cogent descriptions you may consult, from two (otherwise, in a normal world) diametrically opposed sources -- NPR and Glenn Beck.
The wikipedia entry[1] is even worse. It literally lists the associated platforms as including: "white supremacism, Islamophobia, antifeminism, homophobia, antisemitism, ethno-nationalism". You'd swear these people, whoever they are, are the American ISIS.
helpfulanon: I think there are more people than you expected here who are willing to state that they lean right. (That's not the same as "closeted alt-right" by any means.) Some of those people are a bit strident right now. But there are a bunch of people who lean left who are pretty bitter, too. And I think that the only thing that changed was that we had an election. Those people who lean right, leaned right before the election. They didn't just come here in the past week to triumphantly throw their weight around.
newswriter99: According to your definition. I don't think that's the right definition, though. Wikipedia's definition seems pretty accurate: "The alt-right is a loose group of people with far right ideologies who reject mainstream conservatism in the United States." That's why they're "alt" - they reject the normal, mainstream right. So not everyone who voted Republican is alt-right. Trump, however, is certainly not a candidate who embraced normal conservatism, so it might be fair to call him an alt-right candidate.
The Wikipedia goes on to say (also, quoting Wikipedia as a source, kek) that there's no telling how many of the "alt-right" are trolling, how many are dead serious, and how many fall in between.
I repeat my previous statement: the term is meaningless.
One tell of someone who supports the goals of the alt-right is use of oddball terms like "kek." So you're not a disinterested bystander curious about the labeling of the alt-right, you are most likely a member of the alt-right, and as claimed above, attempting to extend the Overton window.
I've become beyond paranoid, there is clearly some secret IRC channel where the alt-right that are too sophisticated for 4chan are coordinating. The pile-on in HN has become like an intellectualized version of Facebook comments at this point
To be fair, the view that the modern Democratic party is center-right isn't one exclusively held by the alt-right, but something that's held by the progressive left as well. HRC didn't only lose because of a resurgence of the populist right, but because of an enormous drop-off in left-leaning political support.
Not to mention, a lot of the "alt right" is not particularly right wing at all, some (like protectionism) is even left wing.