However, once we have settled on a nominee, it will very much be against the TOS to say you wouldn't vote for her......if she is the nominee.

I would tread very carefully.

I encourage you.

A little world in which you can pretend all the Sanders supporters will make a 180 and support a neoliberal. When all of us are effectively muzzled here on DU, enjoy the delusions where dissent from the real Democrats won't be heard. Don't kid yourself though, you may not have to hear it but I promise you that won't change the reality of it.

Scream it from the mountain tops if you want. After that they'll run you.

So don't. It's nobody's business but yours.

And when the time comes that I can't say that at DU, I will respectfully leave...and only return if I am allowed to state that I did not vote for her.

But, truly, DU under a Clinton presidency holds no appeal. To think of what would have to be defended...

And I support it. I too like Bernie. But to not be a hypocrite you need to be prepared to do one more thing. When President Trump or Cruz starts ignoring court orders and with the help of a Republican Congress start suppressing dissenters...keep your pie hole closed and not complain. You will have helped make it happen.

I will (may?) have my moment of truth in the voting booth. I'm not looking forward to it.

But, ultimately, I doubt I can give my vote to a candidate who is so desperately corrupt.

She isn't the candidate we should be running. If she does win, you'll rightly claim victory. If she doesn't win, I damn sure won't be accepting blame from anyone, because I tried my best to do something about it.

Guess I am rare here since I like both our candidates. I would just as well see Bernie as Clinton win the presidency. But if you do not vote for the Democratic candidate, then you, in fact, have not done your best to do something to prevent a Republican victory. And while you may not except the blame, you will own part of it.

not the voters, as few as they are truly

I don't get why it's hard to just not say anything. There are other down ticket races and local/state propositions to support.

Down races or not, the worshipping of neoliberalism is simply too intolerable to not call out.

What you can't go is advocate for a third part nominee or the repub nominee. And you can't encourage others to not vote or vote against Hillary, especially by linking to a petition or don't other page of such action.

That and just about everything else mentioned in this thread.

to the edge?

There will come a point soon where urging others to not vote for the Democratic candidate will be seen as a bad thing, yes.

It got thrown under the bus when the "jury system" came into being.

You can say whatever you want to say now - quote RW talking points, link to RW publications, call Democrats corrupt whores who are all bought-and-paid-for, label AAs as low-info voters, call HRC supporters war-loving 1%ers whose only aim is to destroy democracy as we know it - feel free! Fire away! It's not like anyone here is going to stop you.

You went on record a while back with this same absurd lamentation, IIRC. Guess what? No one was listening then, either.

There, there...

from Skinner - read the whole thing in ATA

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598967

Based on the Terms of Service, we have grounds to ban anyone who states that they do not intend to vote for the Democratic nominee in any general election. There is a popular misconception that the "Vote for Democrats" rule only applies after a nominee has been chosen, but that is not correct. The use of the term "never" is intentional in the section you quoted above.

So the next question, of course, is why so many people have been permitted to claim here on DU that they won't vote for the Democratic nominee, and have not been banned for saying so. The reason is because the admins believe that most people who say this in the context of a contested presidential primary don't actually mean it.

...

I want to be clear that that the Terms of Service remain unchanged, and members are still permitted to express their ambivalence about voting for the eventual nominee. The DU administrators have been allowing members a significant amount of leeway in our interpretation of that clause, but is a limit to how far we are willing to go.

Unfortunately, there are some people here who who say they won't support the nominee and actually won't. As we explained above, our feeling is that we want to give people the benefit of the doubt. But if you convince us that you actually mean it and you really aren't going to support the nominee, then we're going to treat you like you actually mean it.

Is because the admins think they're lying.

will change their minds. Probably true for some and not for others.

I don't see why we shouldn't be critical of all of our politicians. You don't have to tell anyone how you are going to vote, no one can see through your head.