You've taken what I said completely and totally out of context and used the false context as your means of avoiding facing the fact that we cannot abrogate laws mandated by popes that conflict with our opinion-turned-de fide-doctrine.
As far as the papal laws on the election of popes is concerned, we have zero to say about those because we cannot break those laws - because the law only applies to cardinals. It is for the same reason we cannot abrogate or fulfill it's mandates.
We may break the law of fasting, and we may break the law of contracting marriage at forbidden times, and so on, but the laws on papal elections are altogether out of our realm of doing anything other than acknowledging - because we are not cardinals in a conclave electing a new pope.
IOW, we have nothing to do with the law of papal elections - which law states:
29. None of the Cardinals, on the pretext or cause of any excommunication, suspension, interdict or other
ecclesiastical hindrance, can be excluded from the active and passive election of the Supreme Pontiff in any
way; indeed, we suspend such censures and excommunications only for the effect of this election, to those
who will otherwise continue in their strength.
So while you're depending on the idea that heretics cannot be popes, PPX and all popes after him condemn your opinion as noted in the above quote. While you're promoting the idea that heretic cardinals all defected and are outside of the Church, PPX mandated that even excommunicated heretic cardinals must vote in the conclave. He did this for good reason. That you're not understanding it therefore not accepting it, doesn't ipso facto abrogate it, it is still there and will be there until abrogated by (one of the) next popes.
Because even excommunicated heretic cardinals must vote, one of the heretics could be elected. See how the Sainted Pope obliterates your whole opinion-tuned-doctrine that you depend on to maintain a empty chair?
Poll