I've seen a number of these "switched to Hillary" posts.
Does anyone have a comparative count of "Switched to Hillary" vs "Switched to Bernie?" This is a good one.
https://medium.com/robinalperstein/on-becoming-anti-bernie-ee87943ae699#.avb3lmmz8
= new reply since forum marked as read
just a gut feeling or do you have any facts to back that up? Just asking, because you seem pretty positive about it. I'm a Hillary supporter now, but spent a long time going back and forth before I decided on her...sometimes people do that. 
Sorry, but you were right in your first post. Gut feeling.
It seems to be what you're going on with your opinion also, correct?
But it's important to read what they say and how they say it.
If someone writes "I supported Hillary until I saw what an oligarch she was!" then I'm immediately suspicious.
It seems like nobody can disagree with you. Other people have other views. It's just life.
simply an amendment here or there. Further, these amendments are certainly not specific to women's issues. Casting one of the 60 votes needed for Obamacare is laudable on Bernie's part, but hardly a maverick political gesture since he had plenty of good company. In fact, it seems somewhat hypocritical now when all he wants is to start over from scratch with health care instead of strengthening and building upon its good aspects as Hillary wants to.
Making a difference includes a long list of pro-women's and children's rights accomplishments such as Hillary accomplished - even before she was First Lady of the US - and has continued to accomplish since, even on a global level. Do you have any idea how courageous it was for her to go to Beijing, China in 1995, for example, to declare that "women's rights are human rights" and stand up to the Government of China's one-child policy and dowry rights? http://time.com/4125236/hillary-clinton-beijing-speech-video/ This speech, btw, is considered by American Rhetoric to be one of the top American speeches. See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_Rights_Are_Human_Rights and http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/hillaryclintonbeijingspeech.htm It also helped to provide the impetus for the creation of UN Women (http://www.unwomen.org/en) in 2010.
What programs has Bernie initiated and seen through to fruition that have specifically helped women? What has he said about the outrageous and consistent GOPer efforts to overturn Roe v Wade and initiate personhood legislation, etc.? You should be able to find at least something if he is so much the better candidate for women.
In re your query about the Vatican, yes, I would indeed have called it a stunt, if Hillary had done it. I would possibly have called it something even worse.
But HRC has the great good sense not to get herself invited to any program in a foreign country that could possibly be misconstrued while she is in the middle of a campaign for President of the US; certainly she would never attend a program that was sponsored in a foreign country by a religious institution that has a long history of interference in internal governmental politics (although not so much in recent centuries) and certainly not one with severe anti-women reproductive rights policies. Not only is this mixing up Church and State - a REAL no-no per the US Constitution - it is against protocol, period. Foreign leaders, etc. tend to want to keep on the sidelines during political campaigns so that they don't inadvertently make an enemy of the person who ends up being elected. Hillary knows that and any candidate who has an actual glimmer about foreign policy also knows that. Bernie's doing this showed what an abysmal chasm there is between Hillary's knowledge and experience and Bernie's.
Bernie was under the mistaken impression that the document under discussion was written by Pope Francis. It was not, but rather by Pope John Paul II and he even had to be corrected while at the conference. Bernie also deliberately gave the impression to those who asked that his invitation had come from the Pope. It had not.
The Pope and foreign Heads of State (assuming they are compos mentis) will bend over backwards NOT to give the impression that they favor any particular candidate over another - especially during a US election. This is an unwritten role. Bernie and his campaign either didn't understand it or did understand and simply ran roughshod over it. Bernie's practically forcing a meeting with Pope Francis when the Pope's focus was on the serious humanitarian situation with refugees from various ME conflicts who are trying desperately to get to Europe and are currently in dire circumstances was a major faux pas.
From Bernie's own account of their meeting, he didn't even acknowledge the Pope's mission to Lesbos. Per CNN"s account,
"I just wanted to let him know how appreciative I was and the extraordinary role he's playing throughout the world in raising consciousness about massive levels of income and wealth inequality," he said. http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/16/politics/bernie-sanders-pope-francis-vatican-visit/ 
They stand within 2 pts of each other. A statistical tie.
