Hillary Clinton’s campaign is trying to figure out “how to address the anger about income inequality without overly vilifying the wealthy,” reported Amy Chozick in the New York Times over the weekend. “Whether Mrs. Clinton’s approach will be enough to satisfy the unease over growing economic disparity is unclear. In a Gallup poll conducted last month, 67 percent of Americans said they were dissatisfied with the way income and wealth are distributed in the United States.”

In today’s Times, I have an op-ed putting such poll findings in perspective. The public mildly dislikes inequality; it’s not an issue most people get worked up about. That’s why the issue has not paid off for Democrats, and part of why it won’t pay off for Republicans either.

It’s also worth noting that the public concern about inequality does not appear to be rising. Gallup has not been asking the question Chozick cites for very long, but the finding that 67 percent of people say they are dissatisfied with the distribution of income and wealth is consistent with other poll findings that allow us to look at trends over time. A CBS/New York Times poll a year ago, for example, found 63 percent of the public thought “the money and wealth in this country should be more evenly distributed among more people.” In 1987 and 1990, that number was. . . 66 percent.

The Harris poll recently found that 81 percent of the public thought that the rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer. It found almost exactly the same number (82 percent) in 1990 and 1992. If we don’t think that public sentiment was dominated by “anger” and “unease” about rising inequality back then, maybe we shouldn’t conclude that it is today either.