I’ve been a registered Democrat since I was 18, and I trust the Democratic party more than any other to select qualified candidates that reflect my values. That doesn’t alter my right to evaluate any candidate as an individual, however. Simply being the nominee of the Democratic party would not guarantee my vote, especially for President.
I will pledge however, to refrain from mean-spirited criticism or innuendo towards a Democratic party nominee or the party itself, after the candidate has secured the nomination. In that event I would probably just take a break from following politics so closely and pursue other activities. (Hiking and yard work, in my case. I also want to grow watermelon.) Just off the top of my head, following are some basic standards of evaluation that I would apply to any Presidential candidate:
1. Record of showing fundamental civility, especially in debates.
2. Earning of basic trust by fulfilling commitments, especially promises to release tax returns prior to the period the candidate was exploring a Presidential run.
2. Absolutely no connections to Russia, including not having key staff that worked for Pro-Russian governments. Release of tax returns would also be important in ensuring qualification in this area.
4. No record of running a campaign that stole data from political opponents.
5. No record of doing exactly what I described above: Engaging in mean-spirited criticism or innuendo towards a Democratic party nominee, or the party itself, after the candidate had secured a nomination.
Obviously, Jill Stein would not qualify based on the above criteria.
Of course, I only speak for myself, but there are probably others with similar opinions. There must be some supporters of Jill Stein still out there somewhere, and I respectfully suggest that they review in their own minds whether their continued support is really a rational, unifying, and helpful action in the interest of the Progressive cause.