General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary Clinton is rich. She is not Mitt Romney rich. [View all]DirkGently
(12,151 posts)HRC got nailed initially not for being rich, but for glibly suggesting she and Bill had been "broke" when they left the White House. That it was hard keeping up the mortgage(S). What that communicated, fairly or not, is that Hillary may not be very sensitive to what being poor or broke in America really means. Whether that gaffe really supports that criticism or not is open to debate, but it hits her right where some liberals doubt her.
As for being merely very rich as opposed to Romney's mega-rich, that's pretty irrelevant. It's not a numbers game; it's a question of the perspective each of them take from it. We know Romney's: He views tax avoidance as a fun hobby, and the half of America that's too poor to pay income tax as feckless "victims" looking for government to absolve them of personal responsibility. In short, he's an arrogant idiot who believes he owes nothing to the country that fostered his wealth, and that anyone in bad financial straits lacks his character.
Clinton or anyone else looking for liberal support don't need to show they're poor. They just need to show they understand that their proposed constituents include people struggling with just the one mortgage.