When the Democratic candidates for president held their first debate last June, there were so many people on stage that the event had to be split into two nights. In his post-game analysis in the New York Times, Frank Bruni only mentioned Bernie Sanders in sentences about the “Sanders and Warren” wing of the Democratic party. Bruni clearly thought that the “Sanders and” part was about to become a thing of the past. Warren’s “passion and confidence should petrify Bernie Sanders,” Bruni wrote, “whose song she sings better than he does.”

In September, Nate Silver was arguing that it was misleading to speak of Biden, Sanders, and Warren as the “top three” candidates in the field instead of just talking about Biden and Warren as the “top two.” (His original pick for the pair of candidates most likely to win was Biden and Kamala Harris.) As late as January, Silver was projecting an outright majority in pledged delegates . . . for Joe Biden.

If someone had told Silver or Bruni any time last year that, although the field would remain fairly crowded, Bernie Sanders would garner the most votes in the first three states and come in second in South Carolina, they would have dismissed it as the fantasy of a deluded Bernie Bro. Even the average Sanders supporter probably would have considered it a bit too optimistic. But that’s exactly what has happened.