[KMag]

I'm still not connecting the dots. If nuclear succeeds, then it makes Elon look bad? Buying nuclear stocks doesn't help the nuclear companies unless they're making secondary offerings. If nuclear success makes Elon look bad, then maybe VC funding would be the way to go, but I'm not sure there's much overlap between people with influence in VC funds and hedge fund managers who were big Tesla shorts.

Something really doesn't make sense here, but there aren't enough details in your post to tell if fund managers are really being that irrational, or if the post itself just doesn't make sense.

[partingshots]

The future that is envisioned in a scenario where Tesla wins is batteries as the base load energy supply.

The push for nuclear, with the goal of becoming the base load instead, is meant to subvert and supplant that narrative.

[KMag]

That part I kind of understand. However, I'm having trouble seeing the strings by which the puppet masters manipulate the marionettes. These hedge fund managers who shorted Tesla... they're trying to bring about a nuclear future... buy buying already issued nuclear-related stocks? Have there been any big secondary stock offerings in the nuclear industry lately? Are the puppet masters buying up corporate debt instruments in large volumes? If they're calling in favors from journalists, why do journalists owe them favors?

I'm willing to believe the players on the stage are marionettes, but I need to be told where to look for the strings so I can see them for myself. Exactly how are these sour Tesla shorts pushing nuclear?

[partingshots]

You’re purposely being obtuse so I’m going to stop responding to you now.

To everyone else, hedge funds don’t give a shit about what actually happens except that they can make money on it. And if you’re curious about how salty hedge funds can get when they lose on a trade, I recommend looking up the Herbalife saga. Tesla and GameStop are still currently ongoing examples as well.

[KMag]

I'm not being obtuse. I'm trying to help you present a testable hypothesis. You've done a good job at explaining the "who" and the "why", but you haven't given any examples of "what" these Tesla shorts are doing to promote nuclear power. I tried giving some possible examples of actions they might plausibly take to promote nuclear power.

Without any verifiable examples of things Tesla shorts are doing to promote nuclear power, your statement comes across as a conspiracy theory.