Five months ago, I was a die-hard Bernie supporter. I went to a rally. I proudly wore a button on my backpack proclaiming that I “Feel the Bern.” I advocated for him in any conversation that turned political. I supported Bernie because I thought he had my best interest in mind. Sure, his platform was a little skimpy of specifics, and sure, his plans were ambitious, to say the least. But I didn’t care that much. Bernie was a fresh face, an outsider to establishment politics. I thought he could move our country in a new, and better direction.

So when it was stipulated, and then confirmed by a WikiLeak of 20,000 of Hillary Clinton’s emails that Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the DNC chairwoman, had rigged the primary election in Clinton’s favor, I was mad. When she subsequently resigned as chairwoman, and was then hired to the Clinton campaign, I was furious.

Wasserman Schultz’s actions left me feeling disenfranchised, and angry that the political system I had trusted was full of corruption, back-door dealing, and deceit. I thought the superdelegate system was ridiculous, thought it was absurd that voter registration had been choked off early in some states to deter young, likely Bernie supporting dems from voting. I blamed Wasserman Schultz personally for (to use Donald Trump’s notorious accusation) “rigging the election”, and rigging it against the candidate I supported.

But then something happened on the right that changed my mind. It’s name is Donald Trump.

Donald Trump won the GOP primaries fair and square; no superdelegates, no voter registration loopholes, no intervention from party leaders. Donald Trump won his primary because he was a political outsider. Because he was brash, bold, and talked a big (and unrealistic game). Donald Trump has since villainized Hillary Clinton, pitting otherwise loyal Democrats against her. Donald Trump has insulted women, ridiculed minorities, and threatened to tear apart the fabric of American democracy by calling this election “rigged”.

In his path to the GOP nomination, Donald Trump toppled over numerous well-qualified Republicans; Republicans who have served their time in Senate, the House, and State office.

Clinton’s favorite argument against Trump is that the unfit to be President. Trump’s argument against her is that she it corrupt. This election, in all of it’s craziness has brought the the surface not policy issues, as most elections typically do, but issues regarding the legitimacy of our democracy itself. It is almost counterintuitive that the under qualified air-horn of a candidate won the primary fairly and the former First Lady, Secretary of State, and Senator won it with a little help from Debbie.

I could be like many Bernie supporters, who still point blame at DNC and its former chairwoman for putting our party in this situation, for denying Bernie the party nomination, even when many polls from the spring pointed out that he could have handily won the general election against Trump.

But I will no longer do that, because despite the corruption in the DNC, they saved us from a general election with not one, but two candidates unfit for the presidency. Yeah, that’s right. Bernie’s proposals were nice, but they were impossible. Water them down to a level of feasibility and what are you left with? Hillary Clinton. And on top of that, Sander’s experience as mayor of all-white Burlington, Vermont and his time as a Representative and then Senator who did little but slow Congressional progress with his radical views would not have translated well to the White House.

So I won’t blame the DNC for ensuring that Hillary Clinton became the Democratic nominee. We need her this election season to do what Bernie Sander’s would have been unable to do, which is offer a safe and qualified alternative to Donald Trump. Instead, I will point blame at something else that got us where we are today; a general election devoid of a truly good option. I will point blame at something even more dangerous: the partisan barriers of primary season.

29 states have some sort closed primaries, meaning voters may only vote in the primary if they are affiliated with that party. On top of that, the remaining 21 states have rules that require voters to pick a primary, either Democrat or Republican, in which to vote on primary (or caucus) day. In August the New York Times crunched the numbers, and found that only 14 percent of eligible voters, and just nine percent of the entire nation, voted for either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump in the primaries.

In many cases, it is not a lack of interest or involvement among voters that keeps them from the polls on election day, but a lack of party affiliation. In 12 states, the closed primaries are so strict that to vote in the election, one must have registered with the party months in advance.

What we need are blanket primaries, primaries in which voters get to choose their top choice on either side, one Democratic candidate and one Republican. But for some bewildering reason, blanket primaries were ruled unconstitutional in 2000 by California Democratic Party v. Jones.

Blanket primaries may be our best and only hope to upholding legitimacy in our political process. It is unacceptable that the 72 percent of eligible voters that did not, or could not, vote in the primary will be forced to choose from these two undesirable candidates. We vote for our future in the primaries, for the person that will advance to the next step of becoming our leader for the next four, or eight years. For this country to become truly democratic, then We the People need a greater say in the primaries, we need to strip down partisan red tape in the primaries and allow us the opportunity to have two well supported and well qualified candidates in our general election.

We should not have to vote for the lesser of two evils, or two people with a measly 14 percent of national support. That is undemocratic. It is time to overturn California Democratic Party v. Jones and become a country in which our voice can truly be heard.