Yes, we have the Great Commission, but we also have the "peaceable fruit of righteousness," among these "patience" and "hope" ... William Buckley was asked by some dizzy news-reader "how do you feel" on the night Billy Clinton was elected president.
"As a Christian," he said, "I am forbidden to despair."
We are told to be ready in and out of season to "defend the hope that is in us" by Paul and described by Christ as "a city on a hill" that cannot be hidden."
Of course we have to carry the message, our behavior changes daily in the never-fading light of the reality of God in Christ manifest in our hearts, and that makes us a contrast to the darkness around us.
I didn't mean we can be indifferent to the World, just waiting on the roof for His return. As you say, we are to speak the truth in love which is almost always in opposition to the World Spirit of whatever age we are living in, and in the language of those to whom we preach the truth. And each individual who is activated by God's Word spoken by us is, his or herself, of infinite value. If one is saved from most who are not, the remainder who do not or cannot hear, "waxing worse and worse," that's only the big picture to the world, not to God.
That said, and many such similar things, I think often of the words of David, (Psalm 2) "He who sits in the Heavens, laughs."
I just don't see God facing an election, worried about his standing in the polls, so to speak. "Let every man be a liar, and God true."
In my experience, people who are confident in any belief system do not worry about winning the argument, or even of the confidence in those who are convinced of error. We aren't threatened because, after all, God is not threatened. God continues on and on, with ot without the agreement of his creation.
Van Reesbrok, a hundred years before Luther, the founder of the Breathren of the Common Life, wrote, "the eye which the light of God hath clarified remains open, and we may close it nevermore."
To say that people who are confident in their opinion don’t need to “win the argument” is a convenient way to ignore an actual point someone’s making. It’s basically an ad hominem attack: I’m only saying things out of some insecurity, so why bother responding to the actual argument?
The fact is, we’re on a forum — we make points, give and take, sometimes in agreement, sometimes in disagreement, sometimes changing our views, sometimes (ok, usually) not. I don’t assail people personally, though I may attack arguments. You may want to consider doing likewise.