Accepting where the Sanders campaign fell short is a critical step toward developing a game plan for the Democratic Party’s future that can build on what he accomplished. For example, the Sanders campaign will soon be deciding on its priorities for the Democratic convention. If it’s carrying a chip on its shoulder about the lack of support from superdelegates, it might prioritize a fight over the nominating rules in hopes of reducing the number of unpledged delegates in 2020 and beyond. But that would only increase intraparty animosity. And it wouldn’t solve the problems that caused his defeat; the reason Sanders won’t be the nominee is pledged delegates, not superdelegates.

The Sanders campaign will be on firmer ground forcing floor votes on enshrining a $15 minimum wage and opposition to unfair trade deals into the party platform, pulling the party leftward without sparking major dissension. Considering that Clinton did not forcefully reject limits on bank size, compromise language on additional Wall Street reform is probably attainable. But moving into areas where Clinton resisted being pinned down, such as a carbon tax, would produce more convention friction than Sanders needs to establish his influence within the party.

Then, after the convention, where do the Sandernistas go? No doubt time is on their side. The Washington Post’s James Downie, noting that much of the Democratic Party leadership is nearing retirement, says that to triumph, Sanders supporters need to be “running for office and joining party organizations.” Slate’s Jamelle Bouie similarly argues, “The people inspired by Sanders need to do more than beat the establishment; they need to become it.”

But right now Hillary Clinton and all that she and her husband and former boss represent are still the Democratic establishment. And that is unlikely to change anytime soon. If the Sanders campaign proved that ambitious goals can shift the debate, so too did it prove that details win debates and coalitions win elections. Without overcoming those hurdles, youthful idealism may once again cool into middle-aged pragmatism.