“Electability” has been a very heavily-discussed topic among 2020 Democratic presidential candidates. According to a poll by FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos surveying likely Democratic primary voters, nearly 40% said that the most important issue to them is a candidate’s ability to beat Trump. Trailing by close to 30 percentage points, the second most important issue is health care for 11% of respondents.

There is no single definition for electability, though many tend to agree that a candidate with a more moderate platform has better electability than a candidate with a more progressive/conservative platform. The argument goes that a moderate candidate will be better suited to win over independent and swing state voters. Most likely, this is the reason that former Vice President Joe Biden leads in the polls.

The past few elections have shown us very clearly that this is not the case. Voters don’t want a moderate Democrat to swoop in and “save them” from President Trump.

Barack Obama won in 2008 and 2012 with his promises of change. He identified a problem that connected with voters on a deeper level: Americans were working harder, yet the economy was leaving them behind. A sense of urgency began to take hold in the country as people felt more and more like they were being forgotten and no matter how hard they worked, they could not get ahead.

The change delivered by President Obama was not the sweeping change he had promised. An increasingly partisan and hostile Congress prevented him from passing a great deal of legislation that he had wanted to pass.

The 2016 election cycle saw a rise in candidates with populist platforms calling for a complete overhaul of the system. Bernie Sanders’ and Donald Trump’s insurgent campaigns showed that both liberal and conservative voters recognized the need for drastic change, fast. But Sanders didn’t win his party’s nomination. Instead, Hillary Clinton — often seen as corrupt and elite by voters — won.

The change that Donald Trump offered to voters was the perfect message to run against Clinton. He told Americans that the reason they weren’t succeeding was because of corrupt politicians — like Clinton — who were working for their own self-interest rather than for the people. And after 8 years of President Obama, during which things had only continued to get worse for many people, nobody wanted to listen to Hillary Clinton tell them that Donald Trump can’t be allowed to win because of his temperament. People wanted change, and Trump was certainly a change.

Now, as we approach 2020, Democratic voters are overly concerned about who has the best chance of winning over moderate and independent voters.

This approach is absolutely terrible and will only help Trump’s chances in 2020.

The facts are there: the American people want change. President Obama helped at the margins, but did not accomplish the sweeping change he had wanted. Though President Trump would tell you that he has drained the swamp and made America great again, he has not succeeded either. Though to be fair, Trump is just under 3 years into his presidency.

As of writing this article, Joe Biden is the clear front runner in the polls for the 2020 Democratic nomination, most likely due to his perceived “electability.” Biden’s primary focus is that he was Obama’s Vice President, and everything was great under Obama, so let’s just beat Trump and then all will be well. Except Americans don’t want to go back to Obama. Sure, many people would likely prefer Obama to Trump, but the country was on the wrong track well before Trump came along. Obama and Trump both identified the core problem that Americans are dealing with and won because they promised change. Joe Biden’s message to America is that everything will be good again once Trump is defeated, like it was under Obama. Except it won’t, and it wasn’t.

Looking past Biden, some of other candidates are gladly embracing the promise of change. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are pushing “eat the rich” platforms. Both candidates have proposed wealth taxes on the richest individuals in the country (since almost no one else has said it, I feel an obligation to acknowledge the fact that wealth taxes have been tried and have failed in numerous European countries because of serious problems with implementation and enforcement).

Some think a moderate Joe Biden can unite the country. Others think a populist Bernie Sanders can unite the country. I’m going to take a different stance that may be unpopular, and some of you may not agree with.

Andrew Yang is the best candidate to run against President Trump. There’s a chance some of you haven’t even heard of him, yet he is one of seven candidates who has qualified for the December Democratic debate, his poll numbers have been trending upwards all year, and he has proven to be a fundraising force to be reckoned with.

Yang is an interesting candidate, because his policies don’t fit neatly into left or right ideology. His core message is that the American economy is going through the Fourth Industrial Revolution as we speak, where corporations like Amazon soak up $20 billion in business yet pay $0 in taxes, and jobs are disappearing at a rate faster than ever before. Tech corporations are putting countless small businesses out of business and are hoarding all of the profits for themselves.

The anti-tech company platform is not unique to Yang. Warren and Sanders specifically have spoken against corporations like Amazon as well.

Yang sets himself apart from other candidates when it comes to Trump. While other candidates argue that many of our woes will go away once Trump is out of office, Yang argues that Trump’s election is rather a symptom of a greater disease. He often talks about how millions of jobs are disappearing due to automation. The most common jobs in America — truck drivers, retail workers, cashiers, call center workers — are disappearing because companies are realizing that they can have robots do them instead.

This is a natural economic progression. Companies save time and money by allocating work to robots instead of paying workers. Trying to stop it from happening would be pointless and unsuccessful. However, people will continue to be displaced and become unemployed as time goes on. His primary solution is his signature campaign promise: the Freedom Dividend. He proposes giving every American adult $1,000 a month for the rest of their lives, which he says will provide a safety net to Americans who are falling through the cracks, and that it isn’t about the money, but it’s about the people. $1,000 a month would allow people to pay off bills or student loans that have been weighing them down, give people more economic freedom to allow them to pursue their goals in life, and would alleviate stress and societal tensions.

4 million manufacturing jobs were automated away in key swing states that Trump carried in 2016. Millions of average Americans lost their livelihood through no fault of their own, and they weren’t really sure why, because nobody other than Andrew Yang has even mentioned automation. Yang is arguing that this is the biggest reason why Trump won, and to a lesser extent the reason Obama won as well.

It appears to me that Andrew Yang has the best chance to defeat President Trump in 2020 and to fulfill the promises of change that propelled both Obama and Trump to the White House. He is offering Americans a uniquely positive vision for the future, and he has concrete and transparent plans to solve the issues that have been left unchecked for years.

I believe that Yang’s vision for the country will resonate with Americans far more effectively than any of his Democratic rivals because his ideas are not entrenched in the left or the right. He is the visionary that people wanted Obama to be, and the outsider that people wanted Trump to be.