Amid the confusion of Iowa, it is difficult to imagine a more inauspicious start to the presidential primaries for the Democratic Party. The Iowa caucuses is as much an exercise in campaign optics as a contest for pledged delegates. The state is modest in size and its primarily white population is unrepresentative of the United States as a whole.

For the Democratic candidates, Iowa is an opportunity to position themselves favourably for future, more decisive skirmishes. Both early claimants to victory in Iowa, Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg, can be reasonably frustrated at having a valuable political moment marred by the chaotic and error-strewn release of results. However, despite the disarray, there are good reasons to believe that the results worked out extraordinarily well for the Sanders campaign.

Although it is almost certain Sanders won the popular vote and will likely share the lead for pledged delegates, one of the most consequential outcomes for his candidacy was the poor performance of his main rival for the Democratic nomination, Joe Biden. The former vice president is on track to finish fourth, comfortably behind Elizabeth Warren. His failure to secure viability in many precincts indicates a comparatively weak organization on the ground.

Worryingly for Biden, doubts remain over his fundraising capacity and a fourth-place finish in Iowa may undermine his campaign narrative, which is heavily framed around electability. It is true that Biden commands significant support among African American voters, an undoubted advantage in more diverse primary contests—but poor results like Iowa will help other candidates to chip away at his support in those states.

Another plus for Sanders is that, because Buttigieg and Warren finished ahead of Biden, and fifth-place Amy Klobuchar had an encouraging showing, it is probable that none of the major candidates will drop out of a large field. With the addition of former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg, several figures associated with the “moderate” wing of the party will be on future state ballots. This means that moderate support will continue to be split and fail to consolidate around a single candidate.

Moreover, by securing a healthy lead over Warren in Iowa, Sanders solidified himself as the most viable progressive in the race. In the coming weeks, progressives who are currently in the Warren camp may begin to migrate to the Sanders campaign—polling data from the Morning Consult survey found that 52 per cent of Democratic primary voters were now more likely to vote for Sanders after Iowa.

The rise of Pete Buttigieg as the leading moderate in Iowa is also good news for Sanders. Buttigieg currently has no clear path to the nomination, in large part because he has difficulty attracting non-white voters. A recent Washington Post/Ipsos National Poll found that Buttigieg was the top choice of just 2 per cent of black voters (Biden scored an impressive 48 per cent). Of course, the dynamics of the primary may shift, and we should be circumspect in our predictions. Buttigieg surprised many in Iowa and polls indicate he will receive a boost in New Hampshire, a mostly white state. But it is fair to conclude Buttigieg faces a serious challenge in maintaining momentum beyond the early states.

Counter-intuitively, the fact that Sanders and Buttigieg both emerge from Iowa as declared victors may prove beneficial to the former. If Sanders had won by a clear margin, he would have faced concerted political attacks in the build-up to New Hampshire. Democrats and analysts ideologically predisposed against Sanders, as well as those concerned about his prospects against Trump in the general election, would escalate their criticism.

As it turned out, Sanders can make a strong case that he won in Iowa, while Buttigieg, especially in light of his premature declaration of victory, will attract some of the flak that comes with front-runner status. The Iowa result, therefore, looks to have simultaneously enhanced Sanders chances of winning the nomination and partially insulated him from collective censure.

The events of the past week are not without mitigating concerns. It remains to be seen if the image of the Democrats will be damaged by the bumbling in Iowa. Turnout was also well below 2008 levels, a possible indicator of depressed enthusiasm for a party that badly needs it. For Sanders and the other potential nominees, this could be a negative harbinger in their quest to defeat President Donald Trump, and bringing more voters into the electoral process could be key if a Democrat is to win the presidency.

For now, Democrats are tasked with selecting the candidate that will match up against Trump. In the campaign ahead, there are many uncertainties that will only be resolved with time. But as the national focus moves from Iowa, for Bernie Sanders things could hardly have gone better.