But Fr. Kramer seems to believe that Benedict XVI is a true pope, so that makes him different from most other sedevacantists who stopped at Pius XII.

That's true.

Sedevacantist doesn't mean "rejects Pope Francis as Pope" or "rejects the commonly held pope".

Sedevacantist comes from "sede" meaning seat and "vacans" meaning empty. Namely, that the Chair of Peter is empty.

Sedevacantists, by definition, have to believe there is no Pope.

If they believe that Pope Gregory is in hiding, or Pope Benedict XVI is still pope, then they aren't sedevacantist now are they.

If Pope Pius XII declared in 1940's that clergy were supporting the state/gov't and he said they were excommunicated.  And those who are told not to follow them, do follow them, are also excommunicated.

If all those who followed Pope Pius XII, were invalidly nominated, that is, the lineage continued to be Marxist, then what do you call the people who can not follow or be as Pope Pius XXII stated, excommunication?  We can do that to ourselves. These popes after Pope Pius XII are manifest in their actions.  A pope must be Catholic.

Forget the past, forget theology, forget doctrine. All is now appearance, labels and impressions. The man now generally regarded as pope is perceived to be good and liberal, the two being equivalent. To be part of mainstream society, you must not denounce this view. Further, the corruption of language makes it impossible to argue your case. Language is no longer the medium of discussion but is there solely to inform the correct official position. These are great handicaps in a genuine debate about the papal legitimacy of Bergoglio or Ratzinger outside the narrowest of circles. And even among the very few that are prepared to give some thought to the issue, the 'sedevacantist card' lurks in the background as a handy official tool of censure.