All discussions about the 2016 presidential election seem to include the prospect of Hillary Clinton running for office. Indeed, for two reasons, many consider her to be the de facto Democratic candidate.

First, she is incredibly popular among self-described Democrats. Second, she has a large resume, having served as first lady, senator and secretary of state.

On paper, Clinton is certainly a qualified candidate. But assessments of some of her recent actions and connections show that she is, unfortunately, out of touch with average Americans.

The most recent example of this was when the Washington Post unearthed her successful requests to have a spread of crudités and hummus, a computer, lemon wedges and special chair cushions either onstage or backstage when she gave a $300,000 speech at UCLA. That’s the same Clinton who said last summer that she and husband Bill Clinton were “dead broke” and “in debt” upon leaving the White House.

Hillary Clinton’s connections to Wall Street are also troubling. She has given speeches for Goldman Sachs, a financial entity that largely benefited from Bill Clinton’s deregulations and was a key culprit in the country’s economic collapse of 2007.

While Hillary Clinton would likely outperform any conservative that the Republican Party might decide to throw at her in 2016, she should spend the next two years disassociating herself from the corporatism of her past.

By combining her experience with Elizabeth Warren-esque progressive populism, she would better reach out to average Americans and position herself for a successful presidential campaign.