Patriots and those of good will must set their face like adamant against the defeatists and lying purveyors of doom. If by "set their face" you mean marshal every argument and fashion it in logical order to nurture conservatism, I am with you.
Indeed, I salute you for having done so brilliantly in your subsequent reply #71 in which you lay out fact after fact in support of the counter proposition to the effect that Trump will win. As we close on the final days of the election we run the risk here on Free Republic of reliving Valentine's Day when everyone fails to behave as you did in reply #71 and resorts reflexively to the ad hominem. As one who has several times in this forum been zotted by rampaging vigilantes for alleged "trolling" I am wary, very wary, of finding a troll behind every reply.
Free Republic is one of the most valuable, perhaps the most valuable, forums for the full exploration of conservative philosophy by ordinary citizens of goodwill. When we wrangle over the motives of those who appear to be insufficiently zealous, we become in action what we deplore in leftists. We are the crucible of citizen-led conservatism, to serve our foundational principle we require a cauldron where bad ideas are burned and good ore is purified. That cannot occur in a forum contaminating the assay with invective.
You have contributed greatly to this thread in your reply #71. You recite fact after fact which many do not know or have forgotten, all of which support your argument that Donald Trump can and should be reelected. Bravo! But would I be a troll, or a "lying purveyor of doom" if I were to acknowledge the facts you relate and reply "yeah but"? You point out things that I did not know: infiltrators and National Guard; distribution of photos; civilian federal agents; curious videos; arrests of 500 people nationwide. But is not that the significant point, that I did not know these things?
If I did not know these things, one who closely follows the news, I suspect the vast bulk of the voters who are persuadable and who live in the battleground states do not know these things either. My point? In an election year perception trumps reality.
Other facts you do point out that I was aware of: the mobs of overshot; Seattle insurrection; deep blue effects of insurrections and Covid 19; gun sales. All good points, but why have these points, or the points not so well-known, not improved Trump's poll numbers? Carlson makes the argument that the virus and the insurrections by conventional wisdom should have strengthened Trump's position but by all of many poll indications, Trump has rather weakened.
I do not see this as a forum to disparage those sounding the Claxton of danger in November or damn those calling us to arms to defeat this enemy. I regard defeatism as a vice but a vice no more dangerous than adamant, irrational Pollyanna-ish optimism. As I said before the defeat in 2018, I would rather rejoice in the defeat of my pessimism than regret my optimism the day after the election.
Is this a forum to exchange and test conservative ideas in the classically liberal expectation that the best ideas will emerge, or is this a forum for cheerleaders?
Other facts you do point out that I was aware of: the mobs of overshot; Seattle insurrection; deep blue effects of insurrections and Covid 19; gun sales. All good points, but why have these points, or the points not so well-known, not improved Trump's poll numbers? They have. But with a bunch of looney rioters running around beating people up, who's going to admit to the pollster they want to vote for Donald Trump?
The key thing is to push back HARD on the corrupt governors & DAs.
The other thing is, if Q is to be trusted, is in one of his earlier posts. "Death Blossom". That's a reference to the old pre-off-the-shelf-CGI sci-fi movie The Last Starfighter where the Death Blossom was an automated setting on The Last Starfighter's ship, which allowed the the enemy in close and then went berserker on them. predicted "Impossible to defend" and "Total destruction of the Democrat Party."
In addition to the blatant pedophilia and human trafficking (dig around the local news online to see how many of these rings are being broken up), we have Q openly showing photos of 0moeba and Biden with the words Treason and Sedition and the Titles of the US Code referring to them. IIRC President Trump has used the words "treasonous" of 0moeba lately.
Remember when all the right people laughed at Trump for suggesting his headquarters was bugged?
What if, for example, it came out, that we have absolute proof that the Dems helped the Chicoms bring Kung Flu into the country? Or that (say) Dem governors ordered COVID-19 patients into nursing homes in order to kill off senior citizens who tend to vote GOP?
And that brings us back to your earlier point. You say most people are ignorant. Not exactly; and yet not quite as well informed as we would like. Instead of a single dot on a line showing "how well-informed people are" there is a bell curve. From the leading edge to the "I don't follow politics" on the other side. But there are two bell curves: one for how aware, one for the truthfulness of what they know: GOP believe facts and Dems believe lies (glow-bull warming, multi-genders, KKK hoaxes, not even knowing who George Washington is -- (yes, many recent high-school graduates. By design, William Ayers, and Damn You Very Much. Repent!)
So the idea is, to get the masses involved on a practical level instead of letting the politicians do it: the RINOs are worse than useless, they will talk enough to get us off our guard, then fold or stab us in the back at the last minutes (Paul Ryno, Lindsay Grahamnesty, Willard Romney). And the other idea is, to time the revelations so that people are still in the emotional shock and outrage when Nov.3 happens, OR, so that he shock wave from the political nuke takes out the Dam infrastructure.
Trump has been planning for the Presidency most of his life. And he has a track record of well thought-out-plans combined with resiliency and flexibility.
Last point. Early Q posts said, there was another option (unthinkable); most take it to imply military coup. Just remember: Eric Swallowswell while still a declared candidate for the Dem nomination, openly, in public, and in his own name, suggested nuking red voters. Dumb idea, since nukes are devastating to concentrated targets, it's not the RED voters who are bunched up in cities; they are dispersed and many much more independent of the grid than blue voters. If the left wants to suggest things like that, they are offering to go first in a game of Russian Roulette with six loaded chambers.