The United States will “go from spectator democracy to real democracy when we understand that the future ... doesn’t depend, mainly, on who is our next president. It depends on whether American citizens, fed up with high taxes, high prices, unemployment, waste, war, and corruption, will organize.”

— Howard Zinn, historian, author, and anti-war activist, writing in 1976.

So here it is a mere six days from the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 19. Politicos from both parties are racking their brains to figure out who will win the Democratic presidential nomination, and a surprising candidate seems to have caught fire in the 11th hour — North Carolina’s own Sen. John Edwards.

On Sunday Edwards was endorsed by the Des Moines Register, the state’s largest print publication and a newspaper that is generally held in high regard in journalism circles: “Like all Democratic candidates, Edwards is strongly critical of Bush, but with him it tends to be a little less personal. He emphasizes his goal is not merely to replace Bush, but to change America. He tends to conduct positive, optimistic campaigns,” the paper’s editorial stated.

On the Monday after that endorsement, Jan. 12, Edwards won high praise — but not an endorsement — from a Washington Post editorial: “Some presidential candidates seem to grow shriller or more haggard as the grueling campaign grinds on. North Carolina Sen. John Edwards is the opposite — a candidate who remains as appealing as ever and who seems to have grown more thoughtful and confident.”

Monday also saw a front-page profile in the New York Times that was more than flattering, and the Boston Globe’s political writer Thomas Oliphant had great things to say about Edwards on Sunday, Jan. 11: “He led his opponents into proposing ways to make public universities financially accessible to all kids willing to work. He alone would have the government match every dollar a family can sock away as savings (up to a grand a year). And he was among the first to draw the line at ordinary Americans’ tax cuts in advocating repeal of the breaks legislated under Bush for those making more than $200,000 — an issue finally getting into the headlines because Howard Dean’s repeal-it-all economics left out the people Edwards never forgets.”

A day before all this publicity, a new poll released in Iowa showed Edwards was running a close fourth, one percentage point behind Mass. Sen. John Kerry but well behind Rep. Richard Gephardt and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean.

Where to from here?

I’ve been a small-town, North Carolina newspaper reporter and editor most of my adult life, so to profess any first-hand knowledge or deep insight into presidential politics would be dishonest. I’ve stood behind that closed curtain and pulled the lever or punched a card for many more losers than winners in presidential elections, and if you add in the primaries I’d hate to even tally what my percentage of eventual winners would be.

Since Edwards is our senator, I’ve had several opportunities over the last six years to see him in action. Each time I’ve come away impressed by a politician who somehow seemed sincere, intelligent and — get this — able to completely disagree with citizens and yet do so with a kind of civility that seems lost in today’s political discourse. He sat face-to-face with me at a table in a Canton restaurant when he was running for Senate and spoke about how the success of manufacturers like Blue Ridge Paper was vitally important to the people of Western North Carolina.

Every article mentioned above stressed Edward’s penchant for positive campaigning and his unwavering support for economic policy and tax proposals that would benefit middle-class Americans. Like all the Democrats, he would repeal some of George Bush’s tax cuts and redirect the money into education and health-care initiatives.

Those of us in North Carolina have heard Edwards’ critics loud and clear. He’s missed a whole lot of votes in the Senate while campaigning, and some wonder whether he could have won a second term as our senator.

But the criticism of Edwards for being a trial lawyer is among the weakest of arguments. His clients in those cases have been victims, people who were in some way wronged. I agree that some kind of reform on the amounts paid out in lawsuits is long overdue, but Edwards was simply playing by the rules that were in effect.

Another criticism of Edwards is his lack of experience. What voters need to decide is whether a career in politics is a prerequisite to being president. George Bush had only been governor of Texas when elected, so he surrounded himself with a cabinet and vice president who had many years of experience to draw from.

It’s a long shot to even imagine Edwards lasting past the first few primaries, but there’s something in me that longs to see him — rather than the career politicians like Sen. Joe Lieberman and Rep. Richard Gephardt, rather than the career politicians who also come from rich families like John Kerry and Howard Dean — move to the next level. My grandfather spent his life in the same textile mills that Edwards’ parents toiled in, and I know the kinds of values that come from those hard-working, honest families. Although Edwards is now a wealthy attorney and senator, he came from nothing. A debate between him and George Bush, two polar opposites in terms of family income and pedigree, would be a treat.

The New York Times article on Monday ended with Edwards pondering just such a debate: “If I can be on stage with George Bush in a debate in 2004, with my background, what I’ve spent my life doing, wouldn’t you love to see it? I can beat this guy. I can beat this guy.”

North Carolina’s senator may never get that chance at George Bush, but as the primary season nears he has at least proven that positive campaigning on the issues can still garner serious attention.

(Scott McLeod can be reached at info@smokymountainnews.com)