There's an obvious inconsistency in the results of this poll, which can only be explained by the fact that the 63% of registered Democrats, or self-identified Dems who responded "it's more important to have a nominee who agrees with them" have not yet been made aware of HRC-Sach's intimate ties with and kow-towing to Wall Street, Big Banks and the One Percenters.
She poor-mouthed the Clintons' dire financial straits because she measures her and Bill's $80 million net worth (http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/politician/president/bill-clinton-net-worth/) against the One Percent crowd, which the Clintons are lusting to join. They're on the fringes of that group now, but only in the sense of being bought-and-paid-for politicians. Because to the 1 %ers, politicians are people one hires (like a well-dressed, well-spoken servant) to act in one's best interests - not social equals. In Bill's case, amusing to have as a guest at a party, but for god's sakes don't leave him alone with your wives or daughters.
As far as the really wealthy go, the Clintons will always be parvenues, arrivistes and NOKD (Not Our Kind Dear, as they say in St. Barths and Palm Beach). A parvenue is someone who has risen to a higher economic class but not gained social acceptance.
An arriviste is a person who has recently acquired unaccustomed status, wealth, or success, especially by dubious means and without earning concomitant esteem. "Dubious" is appropriate re the Clintons' wealth because that + $100 million the 2 of them have raked in for speaking fees can accurately be considered as $100 million of debt they have incurred to sponsors expecting payback if HRC makes it to the Oval Office.
(As far as the poll goes, no 1%ers were contacted. They don't have listed numbers and they have people who answer their phones.)
Bottom line: HRC's "ideological purity" as that is defined by Democrats, will not pass the test of either a primary or final campaign for the presidency.