I'd agree with the two of you even if I wasn't a left-leaner, given the specific issues that you pointed out, Jan...
My call is that (going by the $150K Neiman's shopping spree, if nothing else) she may be unfamiliar with certain "family dynamics"; as you said, possibly those relating to financial/educational/social hardship (though she did appear to struggle with college, LOL; and is now experiencing the Wayward Teen phenom.)
But given that her infant is currently managed (for X # of hrs.) by either family or support staff (how else would she have time to hit the campaign trail and concurrently stay in office?) I'm not sure how well acquainted she could be with the *sole charge* (and financially pressured) caregiving that most women are presently forced to deal with at some point in life.
It could be that she has a wealth of undisclosed experience--but this is exactly the problem: We just don't know enough about her at this point (with only glib, fairly superficial journalistic snapshots, plus her comparatively limited education--i.e. no slugging it out in an Ivy League political shark pool/urban socioeconomic trenches, or similar--and work experience in Alaska to go on...)
Does her track record hint at any long-time personal crusade for social justice...?
Maybe she works hard enough at "having it all" to deserve a 150 K "investment-buying" trip to Neiman's...But then, don't most hands-on parents?
Is there likely to be a social or economic trickle-down in store for the majority of us, who wouldn't see the point of even *browsing* in Neiman's--let alone sinking the equivalent of a 25% lump-sum mortgage payment into pretty suits??
Time will tell whether Americans done winking at the socio-economic entitlement of the few at the expense of the many...
