TITULUS VIII:  De potestate episcopali deque iis qui de eadem participant

CAPUT I:  De Episcopis

Can 329 §1. Episcopi sunt Apostolorum successores atque ex divina institutione peculiaribus ecclesiis praeficiuntur quas cuм potestate ordinaria regunt sub auctoritate Romani Pontificis.
 §2. Eos libere nominat Romanus Pontifex.
 §3. Si cui collegio concessum sit ius eligendi Episcopum, servetur praescriptum can. 321.

There is not a single trad bishop who is Apostolorum successor. Also, they're neither nominated by a Pope, nor do they have potestas ordinaria.

If you know the Resistance so well, then why do you believe that they would accept a woman or transgender pope? Please explain.

Because the Catholic encyclopedia explicitly states: "Of course, the ɛƖɛctıon of a heretic, schismatic, or female would be null and void".
I have already heard laypersons of the resistance argue that the ɛƖɛctıon of the Dali Lama as pope would be a valid pope. It follows that if they will argue in favor of the validity of one, perhaps they will argue in favor of the validity of the others. It seems many are very obstinately attached to their position and would refuse to abandon that position despite the obvious.

One should consider this recent move of Bp. Daniel Dolan in the light of the recent disagreement / split between Dolan and Sanborn. For this reason Dolan recalled all his seminarians from MHTs.

Consider first what Bp. Sanborn wrote in his July newsletter. In June, four of our seminarians departed permanently for St. Gertrude’s in the Cincinnati area. Bishop Dolan felt that, owing to the uncertainty of the times, it was preferable that his seminarians be there in his parish.
https://mostholytrinityseminary.org/newsletter/
Furthermore, there are four seminarians at St Gertrude's and they will not return to MHTs. The Ordination of the Subdeaconate is scheduled for September 18th at St. Gertrude's and why are they trained at Bp.Dolan's parish??? Why not at MHTs, since they are offering summer classes. Yes, there is a split over the seminary.
According to inside sources of MHTs it is over the Roman Catholic Institute. 
And now Bp. Dolan is consecrating a new bishop. I am not against the consecration, although it is against Canon Law to consecrate any priest who is not a priest for at least five years. One can ask legitimately the question: Why now? Why not in May or June. It is fishy. It is a power play. It only makes sense in the light of the split 

An example of the hypocrisy of Bp. Dolan comes directly from his own bulletin: See this weeks bulletin: http://www.sgg.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/20210829.pdf page 3 quoting the great theologians McHugh and Callan regarding the prudence of the Church when it comes to refusal of sacraments. But both bishops Dolan and Sanborn have denied Holy Communion to people. 

According to inside sources of MHTs it is over the Roman Catholic Institute.

What is this and why would it cause them to split?

I wouldn’t waste your time, she’s a dogmatic R&R who has never reflected for 3 seconds on the possibility that she could wrong.

Actually, I could be wrong. It's possible that Francis isn't a true pope. But, as a member of the laity of the Catholic Church, it isn't for me to make a decision about it. I don't have any authority in the Church, and don't want any authority. I trust that Our Lord is aware of the situation, and he will and has sorted it out. It remains for us to be faithful Catholics. I don't mind if someone wants to hold the sede position. But they tend to push it on everyone in an obsessive manner.

That's why this new guy's obsessive statements bothered me. He said that the Resistance would accept a woman or transgender pope; and his question shows an obsessive fear because it's an extreme situation that likely won't occur (a woman or transgender pope). Why such an obsessive fear if you truly believe that Our Lord is in charge of His Church?

The more New Church strays farther from Traditional Doctrine and the Catholic teaching, the more ridiculous both the Novus Ordo religion and the ones calling it the Catholic Church appear. Bergoglio the destroyer just made a check mate move stacking the Vatican down with his cardinals (designated so though blocked by heresy) and steering the church towards pachamama worship, diaconesses and adulterous sacrilege. The Novus Ordo will not step back towards Tradition at this rate.

The ideal situation for the “resistance” is a Benedict style pope. Hermeneutic of continuity. Veneer of tradition. The SSPX gets cozy and they can shout deal! While criticizing a Pope that at least seems something Catholic. No one thinks Bergoglio or his cardinals are Catholic. Novus Ordo religion is morphing now entirely.

I’d prefer a Vigano style pope.  In fact, I’d prefer it so much, I’m writing a book based upon this fantasy, which posits a way out of this quagmire.

Plenty of chaos, strife, division, confusion, and scandals/evils in the Sedevacantist quarters of the Trad world. It's not the shangri-la of clarity and simplicity that some make it out to be.

It's quite dishonest for Bp. Sanborn and others to point to the recent "problems" in the SSPX in 2012 (which occasioned the start of the Resistance), and beat their chest about how it proves the shakiness of Recognize and Resist, and why sedevacantism is so much better.

History would strongly disagree with that assessment. If split-offs, divisions, etc. proved your position wrong, then Sedevacantism was proven wrong decades ago, within weeks after it started. They can't even agree on whether or not to elect a new Pope. "It's been 60 years, but yeah, we probably can just do without one. The Orthodox are just fine, right?"

Strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be dispersed. That goes for sedevacantism as well as other quarters of the Trad movement.

One basic, well known problem is how the SSPV, particularly Fr Jenkins reject Thuc line orders, so that puts puts the sacraments of CMRI and others out of consideration. Daniel Dolan and his consecrator Mark Pivarunas are by that reading no higher than priests, certainly not the auxiliary bishops they claim to be. Sede Popes has proven horrifying, what with the Palmarians and the Independent Catholic Church (known for their 70s 'March on Rome,'  UFOs are now a core of their theology), and allegedly Francis Shuckhardt, claimed to a Pope among the CMRI leadership. Yet another notable issue for some is the non una cuм issue which seems like a means to promote cultishness.

What Bp Williamson does, might in a way seem unambitious, but it keeps Catholics abreast of prideful diversions. The simple things need to be done well. Perhaps the SSPX could try to stop blurring things. +Lefebvre sometimes took different emphasises on issues, but never blurred the Faith. There was also the foresight in seeing that sedevacantism, particularly in its dogmatic understanding, is a blind alley. Ending up like Old Catholics with more bishops than believers, or a 'bishop in every garage' as Fr Cekada RIP once said, is just foolish.