The first I'd heard of Andrew Yang was a year ago this month, when my colleague Eli Sanders ran an incredibly early straw poll on the Democratic candidates for President. There were the usual names (Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren) and, at the very bottom of the list, right below love evangelist Marianne Williamson, was Andrew Yang.

And he won.

Stranger polls, it should be noted, are both unrepresentative and notoriously easy to manipulate—someone actually wrote a script to hack our flag poll last year—so while it's possible that Yang had an army of early fans reading The Stranger, it's equally possible he had one fan refreshing their browser. But a year later, long after more famous, more qualified, and more likely candidates have dropped out of the race, Yang is still in it, hanging on—and even rising. He's qualified for the next debate in New Hampshire on February 7, and a recent Emerson poll placed him at fourth place nationally, after Biden, Sanders, and Warren. I find it highly unlikely he will top those three powerhouses, but it's pretty damn impressive for a guy few people had heard of just one year ago.

So what is it about Andrew Yang? I asked this question yesterday on Twitter, and got over 700 responses.

Of course, plenty of them were (I hope) jokes ("I like how liberal he is with the whipped cream") but the ones that were genuine seemed to follow a pattern: They just like the guy, and it's not entirely about policy. In fact, there were very few responses about his actual policy plans, including his proposed "Freedom Dividend," a universal basic income program that would give a $1,000 monthly allowance to every American citizen.

A few people mentioned that he, unlike nearly every other Democrat, thinks we should embrace new nuclear technologies to fight climate change (something I, and many climate scientists, also agree with) but the majority of the responses were more about personality than policy. As one person—with a trademark #YangGang blue hat in her bio—responded, "He’s incredibly smart, genuine, and forward-thinking. He sincerely cares about people, our country, the world. He’s pragmatic and creative. And he’s funny."

I get it. After watching most of the debates and endless interviews with the candidates, Yang does seem charmingly human compared to the other always-on-message political bots in the race. He has this weird tendency to actually answer the questions that are posed of him instead of reverting to talking points, and it's incredibly refreshing to see. At a debate in December, the candidates were asked why the American public is divided on impeachment and Yang was the only one who actually answered the question. And his answer was a good one: "It's clear why Americans can't agree on impeachment," Yang said. "We're getting news from different sources, and it's making it hard for us even to agree on basic facts." He's right. And unlike some of the other candidates, he doesn't demonize Trump voters, who remain half of the voting population and, I think, shouldn't be entirely written off.

"If you turn on cable network news today, you would think he's our President because of some combination of Russia, racism, Facebook, Hillary Clinton, and emails all mixed together," Yang continued at that debate. "But Americans around the country know different. We blasted away 4 million manufacturing jobs that were primarily based in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Missouri. I just left Iowa—we blasted 40,000 manufacturing jobs there. The more we act like Donald Trump is the cause of all our problems, the more Americans lose trust that we can actually see what's going on in our communities and solve those problems."

As much as I loathe Donald Trump, Trump isn't the cause of all this country's problems; he's a symptom, and Yang is arguably better than any other candidate at reaching across party lines to the people who put Trump in office. As Yang told the New York Times, “I poll 18 percent among college Republicans. I’ve got a higher appeal among independents, libertarians and even some disaffected Trump voters than Joe Biden by the numbers, than Bernie Sanders by the numbers.”

Now, I'm not sure that courting disaffected Trump voters is a winning strategy (Trump still polls in the 90s among Republicans) but there is something uplifting about a candidate for President who doesn't write off half the nation as uniformly evil. Even more of a plus to me is that Yang seems constitutionally unable to pander, and he doesn't lean into identity politics like Elizabeth Warren—who seems to be getting her talking-points from a high school LGBTQ alliance—and Donald Trump, who attempted (and succeeded) to tap into race-based resentment. Identity politics, whether you're on the left or the right, is inherently divisive, and Yang seems to actually get that. It's not about us versus them with Yang. It's just about us.

The movement around Yang isn't as loud or as mobilized as those around Sanders and Warren, but it also lacks the toxic reputation of those campaigns' most ardent and online supporters. The Yang Gang is nice! Even online! And while I personally won't choose my candidate based on the how much I like or loathe his or her supporters, I can see why other people do. If you hate Bernie Bros or Lizzie Lads or Biden Babes or Pete Peeps, why the hell would you want their candiate to win, even if you're ok with that candidate's platform? It's not a rational position to take, but voting isn't always about the rational choice.

Not that I think Yang will take it. I can't see him getting through the Democratic primary any more than I can see Obama winning a third term. And that's fine with me: Even if I like the guy (and think someone who understands the tech industry is preferable to the bevy of candidates who can't figure out how to turn on their iPads), I still don't think that President of the United States is an entry-level position.

And while I appreciate that he's talking about job automation (and while I would love to have an extra thousand dollars a month), his main selling point—Universal Basic Income—has never been tested on a scale like the entire United States. What's more, his plan involves choosing between UBI and benefits like Social Security, disability insurance, food stamps, and housing assistance. The trade-offs to the poor are just too unknown, and so I can't in good conscience vote for a man pitching a total dismantling of the social safety net for an experiment.

But I have thought about it. And even considering voting for Andrew Yang, I think, gives me a little more insight into the minds of some Trump supporters: Like Trump, Yang is under-qualified, his ideas are untested, and it seems like he doesn't have a snow bunny's chance in Hell to win the election. And yet, there's something about the guy. I can't entirely explain it, but part of me still wants to see Andrew Yang in the White House.