So on its face, it would seem a dangerous gamble to attack Romney for trying to address poverty. But that’s how confident Democrats are that their 2012 narratives successfully and decisively defined Romney as an out-of-touch plutocrat. Yes, they are living in glass houses — and they are stockpiling stones.

I’ve heard from dozens, if not hundreds of people who watched the Netflix documentary “Mitt” and said, if only we’d seen that Romney in 2012. But that’s just it — the Mitt that actually exists, the one we see in the film and know off the campaign trail, is no match for the Mitt that the left has created. It is written. It is fact. It is history.

It’s also a shame, because the Mitt that actually exists would have been a formidable candidate and might have been a great president.

But it’s a lesson to the rest of the 2016 Republican field : Don’t get defined early, and don’t save your best material for the after-party.