I actually appreciate your response. Mine:
I believe that there are people in the government who don't agree with the government, regardless of who is running the government. We saw it with Trump. I'm sure it's also true of Biden. I am not convinced Q is one of those people, and I think if Q wanted anyone to have a Great Awakening, outing himself as someone with credibility to make the claims he makes would do more for the Q movement than any Q post ever could.
Every single person in the Q movement believes in holding Democrats and Republicans, who are both corrupt - along with every other "leader" in the world who has enabled Western society to collapse in on itself, accountable. Many of us are more than willing to link hands with whoever else believes that. Is that your "contribution" here, or not?
We have common ground that neither party is free of corrupt individuals and we want them all held accountable, no matter who it is or what level of power they have.
Where we're going to break off is that I see Donald Trump as someone who very obvious represents that corruption I despite, while you do not. Perhaps it's just a difference in perspective, but I imagine we'd also have differences in what constitutes Western society collapsing.
It seems to me that you think you're engaging in ground-breaking diplomacy with a pack of 'delusional freaks' that could actually be hiding in plain sight on Reddit because the only thing that makes them 'delusional freaks' is their belief in "Q" as a legitimate operation.
The only difference between here and Reddit for me is that I am more likely there to say that I believe Q people are wrong about something when I believe they are, and when here, I am more likely to question you directly as to why believe it. I don't hide the fact that I do not support belief in Q, but if I'm here and talking with you about it, then I can at least try to close the gap between our perspectives.
And I am perfectly comfortable being wrong, especially since being wrong about Q costs me absolutely nothing.
I have never called you "delusional freaks" and have often gotten angrygrams from suspicious Reddit users for seeming too friendly toward Q supporters.
Based on everything I know about you, you would willingly put someone like Biden in charge of this country if it meant keeping Trump out of power - that makes your perspective dog shit, along with whatever "research" you think you're contributing to us.
I mean, I very obviously don't believe that Trump is a viable choice for President, but I haven't stopped respectful conversation with the people who disagree with me. That's kind of the point. You are making profoundly important choices about your life and worldview based on the things you believe, so regardless of whether I agree with your beliefs, I do think they're important to understand from your perspective.
If I'm wrong, it means you'd lock Trump, Biden, Hillary, Pelosi, and every other politician in a prison, in favor of maybe a more competent Bernie style outsider who has no intention to dismantle our liberties, strip us till we're defenseless, or cave like a coward to Establishment demands.
I suppose that means that you're wrong, then. :) I don't know if I'd go so far as to unilaterally lock people up based on what I read on the internet, but I would absolutely support some sort of divinely-neutral and deep-diving investigation into all those people, and anyone else who serves in public office. Anyone who committed prison-worthy crimes should be there. I'd love to see the whole two-party system take a dive altogether, to be honest.
I actually appreciate your response. Mine:
I believe that there are people in the government who don't agree with the government, regardless of who is running the government. We saw it with Trump. I'm sure it's also true of Biden. I am not convinced Q is one of those people, and I think if Q wanted anyone to have a Great Awakening, outing himself as someone with credibility to make the claims he makes would do more for the Q movement than any Q post ever could.
Every single person in the Q movement believes in holding Democrats and Republicans, who are both corrupt - along with every other "leader" in the world who has enabled Western society to collapse in on itself, accountable. Many of us are more than willing to link hands with whoever else believes that. Is that your "contribution" here, or not?
We have common ground that neither party is free of corrupt individuals and we want them all held accountable, no matter who it is or what level of power they have.
Where we're going to break off is that I see Donald Trump as someone who very obvious represents that corruption I despite, while you do not. Perhaps it's just a difference in perspective, but I imagine we'd also have differences in what constitutes Western society collapsing.
It seems to me that you think you're engaging in ground-breaking diplomacy with a pack of 'delusional freaks' that could actually be hiding in plain sight on Reddit because the only thing that makes them 'delusional freaks' is their belief in "Q" as a legitimate operation.
The only difference between here and Reddit for me is that I am more likely there to say that I believe Q people are wrong about something when I believe they are, and when here, I am more likely to question you directly as to why believe it. I don't hide the fact that I do not support belief in Q, but if I'm here and talking with you about it, then I can at least try to close the gap between our perspectives.
And I am perfectly comfortable being wrong, especially since being wrong about Q costs me absolutely nothing.
I have never called you "delusional freaks" and have often gotten angrygrams from users for seeming too friendly toward Q supporters.
Based on everything I know about you, you would willingly put someone like Biden in charge of this country if it meant keeping Trump out of power - that makes your perspective dog shit, along with whatever "research" you think you're contributing to us.
I mean, I very obviously don't believe that Trump is a viable choice for President, but I haven't stopped respectful conversation with the people who disagree with me. That's kind of the point. You are making profoundly important choices about your life and worldview based on the things you believe, so regardless of whether I agree with your beliefs, I do think they're important to understand from your perspective.
If I'm wrong, it means you'd lock Trump, Biden, Hillary, Pelosi, and every other politician in a prison, in favor of maybe a more competent Bernie style outsider who has no intention to dismantle our liberties, strip us till we're defenseless, or cave like a coward to Establishment demands.
I suppose that means that you're wrong, then. :) I don't know if I'd go so far as to unilaterally lock people up based on what I read on the internet, but I would absolutely support some sort of divinely-neutral and deep-diving investigation into all those people, and anyone else who serves in public office. Anyone who committed prison-worthy crimes should be there. I'd love to see the whole two-party system take a dive altogether, to be honest.
I actually appreciate your response. Mine:
I believe that there are people in the government who don't agree with the government, regardless of who is running the government. We saw it with Trump. I'm sure it's also true of Biden. I am not convinced Q is one of those people, and I think if Q wanted anyone to have a Great Awakening, outing himself as someone with credibility to make the claims he makes would do more for the Q movement than any Q post ever could.
Every single person in the Q movement believes in holding Democrats and Republicans, who are both corrupt - along with every other "leader" in the world who has enabled Western society to collapse in on itself, accountable. Many of us are more than willing to link hands with whoever else believes that. Is that your "contribution" here, or not?
We have common ground that neither party is free of corrupt individuals and we want them all held accountable, no matter who it is or what level of power they have.
Where we're going to break off is that I see Donald Trump as someone who very obvious represents that corruption I despite, while you do not. Perhaps it's just a difference in perspective, but I imagine we'd also have differences in what constitutes Western society collapsing.
It seems to me that you think you're engaging in ground-breaking diplomacy with a pack of 'delusional freaks' that could actually be hiding in plain sight on Reddit because the only thing that makes them 'delusional freaks' is their belief in "Q" as a legitimate operation.
The only difference between here and Reddit for me is that I am more likely there to say that I believe Q people are wrong about something when I believe they are, and when here, I am more likely to question why you directly as to believe it. I don't hide the fact that I do not support belief in Q, but if I'm here and talking with you about it, then I can at least try to close the gap between our perspectives.
And I am perfectly comfortable being wrong, especially since being wrong about Q costs me absolutely nothing.
I have never called you "delusional freaks" and have often gotten angrygrams from users for seeming too friendly toward Q supporters.
Based on everything I know about you, you would willingly put someone like Biden in charge of this country if it meant keeping Trump out of power - that makes your perspective dog shit, along with whatever "research" you think you're contributing to us.
I mean, I very obviously don't believe that Trump is a viable choice for President, but I haven't stopped respectful conversation with the people who disagree with me. That's kind of the point. You are making profoundly important choices about your life and worldview based on the things you believe, so regardless of whether I agree with your beliefs, I do think they're important to understand from your perspective.
If I'm wrong, it means you'd lock Trump, Biden, Hillary, Pelosi, and every other politician in a prison, in favor of maybe a more competent Bernie style outsider who has no intention to dismantle our liberties, strip us till we're defenseless, or cave like a coward to Establishment demands.
I suppose that means that you're wrong, then. :) I don't know if I'd go so far as to unilaterally lock people up based on what I read on the internet, but I would absolutely support some sort of divinely-neutral and deep-diving investigation into all those people, and anyone else who serves in public office. Anyone who committed prison-worthy crimes should be there. I'd love to see the whole two-party system take a dive altogether, to be honest.