With Romney’s candidacy, there is an odd paradox at work. In terms of the political issues that deal with income inequality, he’s really no different than any other candidate the GOP might conceivably nominate, favoring economic policies that offer tangible benefits mainly to the wealthy. And actually, his program is marginally less hostile to the middle class than those of his rivals. Recall, for instance, that Newt Gingrich – who is now slamming Romney as a symbol of irresponsible corporate behavior – actually criticized him in a December debate for not supporting the elimination of the capital gains tax.

But unlike Gingrich and the rest of the GOP field, Romney embodies the super-wealthy/corporate-type that Democrats like to accuse Republicans of coddling – making it much harder for him to credibly reject the charge. A Republican nominee running on the same platform but lacking Romney’s aristocratic bearing could more credibly reassure voters that he’s not doing the bidding of plutocrats.

A prime example of this kind of Republican can be found in Romney’s top surrogate, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. Just like Romney and every other major Republican, Christie has lashed out at Obama’s “class warfare” and argued for policies that benefit the rich. One of his first acts as governor was the killing of the state’s millionaires’ tax. But he embodies the image of the blunt, take-no-crap Jersey working stiff – not the sort of person you’d expect to kowtow before the moneyed elite.

This may explain why some of the most insistent calls for Christie to enter the presidential race back in the fall came from the who’s who of super-elite GOP donors. As the New York Times reported at the time:

They are rich. They are unattached. They are looking for a little excitement.

Meet the Draft Christie committee, a small but influential group of Republican-leaning donors and activists, many based in New York, united by a shared desire to see Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey run for president.

There is Kenneth G. Langone, the billionaire Home Depot founder who is perhaps Mr. Christie’s most fervent booster; Paul E. Singer, the publicity-shy hedge fund magnate and Republican activist who is among the most-sought-after Republican donors in the country; and David H. Koch, the industrialist, Tea Party benefactor and, according to Forbes, the richest man in New York.

Charles R. Schwab, the personal investment guru, is also among those who have shown interest in seeing a Christie presidential bid, according to published reports and people familiar with the discussions, as is the financier Stanley F. Druckenmiller. So are the hedge fund managers David Tepper and Daniel S. Loeb, a onetime supporter of President Obama.

In theory, these men should have been happy to sign on with Romney, a man who comes from their world, shares their basic outlook and values, and was within striking distance of the Republican nomination. Could it be that they understood how politically toxic Wall Street had become and feared that Romney might be just a little too much like them to win a general election?

Christie, obviously, decided against running. But the promise his candidacy held for Republicans – working-class cover for a top 1 percent agenda – underscores the reality of Romney’s candidacy: At this point, he gives the GOP its best chance of winning – but they could have done better.

* * *

I was on “The Rachel Maddow Show” last night and discussed Romney’s top 1 percent problem. The full segment is below. Note: During the segment, I mentioned a photo that’s been making the rounds that seems to show Romney receiving a shoeshine on an airport tarmac. It turns out he was actually going through a TSA security screening, although in a way this reinforces the point: Because of Romney’s background and style, even actions can serve as a reminder of his privileged status.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy