With 75 replies to the OP there still is not much unity about whether to be or not to be Sedevacantist. Traditional Catholics should know that the Pope is the source of unity. It seems then what is needed to restore unity is to choose a truly Catholic Pope. Sedevacantists are the ones that are in a position to work toward this end. Non-sedevacantists are in a position to defeat a truly Catholic Pope.

Bishops that want to work toward unity and choose a Pope will only succeed with the encouragement/push from sedevacantists. Non-sedevacantists will never allow their bishops to even discuss it. 

The November, 2025 issue of "Adsum" by Bishop Pivarunas, CMRI has the following:

"Dear Friends and Benefactors,
   During our annual Fatima Conference at Mount St. Michael, it was a unique occasion to have three visiting traditional bishops: Bishop Pierre Roy (Canada), Bishop Martin Davila (Mexico), and Bishop Pio Espina (Argentina). Not only was their visit an opportunity for the faithful to hear conferences from them, it also was a great occasion for the bishops to confer with one another on the mission of the Church.
   Before my episcopal consecration in September of 1991, the late Bishop Moises Carmona required me to take an Oath of Unity to work for the unity of traditional Catholics everywhere. Sometime after the New Year, we plan to meet again, and it is our hope to have other traditional bishops join us to discuss the present crisis in the Church.

   My episcopal motto is 'Animam Pro Ovibus Ponere' 'to lay down my life for the sheep'. It is my sincere desire to see the true Church of Christ - the Catholic Church - flourish everywhere and to provide whatever assistance possible to my fellow bishops."

I disagree, though you may be right in most cases regarding your statement. I think sedes may be in a position to reject a truly Catholic Pope for having spent so much time rejecting popes by their own judgment. Non sedes, having not been judging the Pope, just his actions, and practicing a spirit of unity and submission to whatever limited extent is prudent in this situation, would readily follow a Traditional Pope.

I think that not only should non-sedes be ok with it, but that it may be the duty of our bishops to continually present the Pope with his errors, and the Traditions of the church that prove he is doing wrong, and that declare if he persists, it may be judged by the church through whatever members are in good standing with the Traditions of the church, starting with the members of highest rank, to depose a Pope persistent in grave error and harm to souls. Otherwise, Resistance or Indult, the bishops might as well be approving of Pope Leo XIV if they just ignore his wrongdoings and do nothing to remedy this particular core problem.

Then, having gone through the proper channels of authority, the situation may be remedied with the election of a new Pope. Although, my faith in the modern traditional clergy to agree in their choice of a Pope as good as we need is lacking.

Sedes don't judge popes. They judge that a particular man cannot be, or could not have been, a true pope. Entirely two different things.

You, however, are promoting the concept of deposing a pope, which is in fact judging a pope, and such has been condemned by the Church as Gallicanism/Conciliarism. 

Really, only Sedes will be able to discern a true pope, because they are the only ones who currently can easily discern who are not true popes.

When a man becomes Bishop of Rome and starts immediately cleaning house (analogous to the current Trump phenomenon) and condemns Vatican II and all its false popes, then we know we have a true pope.