The results of the New Hampshire primaries have helped clarify a complicated Democratic presidential nomination contest. One thing taking shape, in an admittedly still foggy space, is that Bernie Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont, has built a campaign that’s energetic and appealing, earning him not just a victory in New Hampshire but a (tenuous) spot as the race’s front-runner.

Much ado has been made about Sanders’s democratic socialist beliefs being a potential ideological liability, but the reality appears to be that voters aren’t looking for philosophical labeling, but a leader for a movement. Despite the intermittent furor over Sanders’s so-called “internet army,” it is the dedicated army of volunteers that has the potential to make the real difference in primaries to come.

It’s no secret that the results out of New Hampshire and Iowa are a bit complicated. Taking the two states together, Sanders has beat second-place candidate Pete Buttigieg by thousands of votes in popular measures, yet, due to Iowa's electoral intricacies, Buttigieg still has a slight lead in the delegate count. Because of this murkiness, it’s strange to see bold declarations being made about New Hampshire’s second- and third-place finishers, but not the winner.

On the Today Show, the “Buttigieg phenomenon” is “extraordinary.” A perspective from the Washington Post asks if Mayor Pete is “Jimmy Carter 2.0.” This comes after Iowa focused the media’s attention on Buttigieg’s “electability.”

Meanwhile, some experts are declaring Amy Klobuchar New Hampshire’s “real winner.” Analysis from NBC News claimed that her “bronze is gold,” positioning her third-place finish as the evening’s biggest victory. These ideas affirm that the Minnesota senator is riding a wave of “Klomentum” following a strong performance in the most recent Democratic debate, hosted in New Hampshire. It is no wonder that so much media attention has been focused on these candidates. Their campaigns have ready-made narratives for center-left observers.

Buttigieg has a midwestern charm and outsider allure as a former Indiana mayor, and the historic nature of his run as an openly gay man has been compared to other trailblazing Democratic rising stars of the past. Klobuchar has her own midwestern mom-joke magnetism. She has shown life as the kind of bold and brassy woman who could trash talk Trump to his face — perhaps without carrying as much unfortunate baggage as the last woman who tried to do so.

Both Buttigieg and Klobuchar embody the kind of white moderate energy that many in liberal spaces have been focused on since 2016. They were more competitive with Sanders on the white vote (though he still had the highest percentage), and won the older demographics that appear to have comprised more of the New Hampshire electorate. They have both made appeals to centrist independents and Republicans who might be fed up with Donald Trump. Only Klobuchar has Washington experience, but both have demonstrated that they’re adept machinists when operating in our electoral politics.

That technical mastery of the system is a far cry from what the current front-runner offers. Sanders is a ghost in this machine made flesh. After spending a lengthy congressional tenure haunting the liberal imagination, he has manifested a campaign that perhaps spooks establishment media and moderate Democrats, but his supporters see as grounded in movement politics with a leader they feel they can trust.

In his victory speech on Tuesday night, Sanders started off by thanking the people of New Hampshire and his thousands of volunteers in the state, crediting those canvassers with his success in Iowa and New Hampshire. After turning his ire to Trump and calling for Democratic unity, Sanders spoke more about this coalition and his unique position as a presidential contender.