Wouldn't it suffice for both POTUS and 'Q' to simply use that specific name or word directly to convey a clear, undeniable "1+1=2" truth?
This movement is already recognized globally, so it’s hardly a new phenomenon—but here is the single most definitive, ultimate point:
There is zero noise caused by unnecessary mathematics or timing issues
Suppose can see how explicitly naming someone carries a certain weight, but then again, the parties already deemed clear enemies have essentially been named outright.
Point is, really, that the situation isn't exactly set in stone yet, is it?
If you’re adamant that it is certain, though, why not just hash it out thoroughly?
If a back-and-forth dialogue isn't possible, then it’s just a matter of continuing to provide proof—but even so, if this movement keeps gaining momentum, it’s bound to trigger a reaction
>People are talking and waking up
Yes, everyone has realized it long ago, but it is this Anon who sees the inability to join this movement as the problem
So, it’s just a standard question, then
Well, the reason I’m bringing this up is simply because I feel there are a lot of unclear aspects to it
Dead men tell no tales
I mean, there are probably cases where people hear what's being said but just don't know what to do about it, right?
Ultimately, I get the feeling that a lot of people think—if the goal is just to gather followers and validate their own views—there’s no real need to participate here
Well, as for what the essence of this movement actually is—that’s something a "newfag" like me wouldn't know, so I'm going to bed now
Good night
I didn't really care what you thought of me
I don't mind, so I'm fine
Of course, if there’s a problem, hash it out thoroughly(But I'm going now)
It feels like this movement spreads through people's words and actions
>>24749075 (me)