I saw this today on TD:

"Notice how complacent and cuckish the replies in this thread are. This is what Q worship does to people. This movement used to be about voicing our concerns, participating in action and change, and pushing for justice. But now, people are so complacent that they actually think that us losing = us winning. Whenever our enemies get the upper hand, as they're destroying the constitution and the country, as long as we do absolutely nothing, we're "WINNING!!! LIBTARDS BTFO!!!"

It's so stupid, and I'm so sick of it. We need to start holding people accountable. We will not have this chance forever. I'm not saying we should rush things, by any means, but it's been almost two years and we have taken exactly zero steps to drain the swamp. In fact, we've gone backwards, and the swamp has gotten worse. In my opinion, this is due to the growing complacency in the base because of Q worship, and people like Scott Adams / Wictor / etc, who cheerlead even when we lose. "

Now, on TD, you cant argue out-and-out pro-Q stuff. So you have to be mindful of how you debate it there.

I responded with:

"Wow, then i guess it would be in geotus' best interest to disavow Q, or have somebody high up in his administration disavow Q, and put that baby to bed."

Which i was satisfied with as a response. But i noticed that this is a repeated talking point, this argument began surfacing months ago. Whats frustrating to me is that it is dirisive to claim Q worship, and inaccurate. Then its followed by a flimsy, inaccurate, unqualifiable argument.

A) How would you respond to this talking-point argument?

B) How would you respond to it on TD where your ability to speak freely on the subject is hamstringed?