I voted "no," because their very existence is predicated upon their principled acceptance of the modernist doctrines of Vatican II and the post-conciliar deformations.
From Ecclesia Dei Adflicta: ''
"To all those Catholic faithful who feel attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary [but not dogmatic or doctrinal!] forms of the Latin tradition, I wish to manifest my will to facilitate their ecclesial communion by means of the necessary measures to guarantee respect for their aspirations."
and again:
"...priests, seminarians, religious communities, or individuals until now linked in various ways to the Fraternity founded by Archbishop Lefebvre, who may wish to remain united to the Successor of Peter in the Catholic Church while preserving their spiritual and liturgical [but not dogmatic or dontrinal!] traditions..."
And this same motu proprio reaffirming the provisions of the 1984 letter, which containd this condition:
"Since, however, the same problem continues, the Supreme Pontiff, in a desire to meet the wishes of these groups grants to diocesan bishops the possibility of using an indult whereby priests and faithful, who shall be expressly indicated in the letter of request to be presented to their own bishop, may be able to celebrate Mass by using the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition, but under the following conditions:
a) That it be made publicly clear beyond all ambiguity that such priests and their respective faithful in no way share the positions of those who call in question the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970."
Therefore, if one agrees to forego traditional doctrine, and has no principled objection to the new Mass, in what way would this person be considered "traditional," except in the most superficial sense?