Jumping to a big conclusion, I'll say we are not here to stereotype. If we were, we could add religion, State of origin, bank account, college degrees, previous jobs, number of marriages, campaign consultants, appearance on talk shows, and on and on.
Now to Edwards regarding poverty. If those who grew up poor do well in the Oval Office we celebrate Abe Lincoln and on occasion LBJ. If we laud the "comfortable" for thinking of the "common man (woman?). we may refer to FDR and JFK.
What should someone wishing to "level the playing field" consider most important? I would say education (not necessarily defined in advanced degrees and fancy institutions)as Number One. BUT! Children won't be prepared for learning if their bodies are unhealthy, so Number Two is access to healthcare. BUT! Parents can't get healthcare where they work if they are poor, so Number Three is to raise wages. Number FOUR would have to be affordable housing, which translates into permanency and family stabiltiy.
The above is pretty much what I see John Edwards striving for in his campaign. "Populism" is being tagged him and rightly so. Populism is people, regardless of gender or ethnic origin.
There's a beautiful flowchart available at uhcan.org. I believe it is pretty much what Edwards has outlined in his health care plan.
As for, what part the populace must play in all these notions, arrows showing twoway interaction are most important. In wordier terms it means: If you give, you get, and vice versa. Welcome to the American cando spirit!
Thanks for posting.