>>3439018

Sa>>3439018

>Further, do not ignore the initial fact that a specific month was listed.

And the revelation occurred in that specific month at the Tampa Bay rally.

If you're saying but but but the news stories didn't appear until the next day which was a different month, you are grasping at straws to claim a disproof.

>If the world knows, why all the questions?

You mean why the denials. Or why isn't Q accepted. Or why is Q called a conspiracy theory.

The point is not to "accept Q" like he is God. This isn't a religious movement. Be as skeptical as you want. Skepticism is good.

The point is to question the mainstream narrative. Q is doing a pretty good job of causing this.

>>3439248

>Random thought… what if this entire Q movement was designed to only do ONE thing… get many of us to believe again that our vote can make a difference?

Then I'd say most of your thoughts are at random and rather rare.

Most anons are and have been planning to vote, and vote R this time whether the like the R or not.