🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a bold forecast – going beyond the winner overall, and precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and has become a kind of local celebrity this year for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani would win although missing Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, as an example, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers surpass the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward Cuomo, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

How was your night?

It was necessary because they were dropping around 200,000 ballots into the tally every few minutes! I felt a little nervous initially: Mamdani led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of ballots added later and his lead went from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

You know, it was possible in which election day turned out kind of poorly for Mamdani, where the opponent was going to end up basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. But the winner gained 500,000 votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani gain additional support from?

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: diverse racially, youthful, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the primary. Plus he boosted his core of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that the left long aimed for: diverse, youthful, tenants and people squeezed by affordability

There were also some supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president previously backed the progressive this year. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Impact

A major development of the election was the record participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I figured it could go over 2 million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to secure victory.

You predicted he’d get over half the ballots. Is he on course for that?

Currently you would say he’s likely to surpass half. He has just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus it’s not certain, but I think probable, and I wish he achieves it so afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His support completely collapsed.

He lost a single precinct in any borough. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, similar to an 88% Trump area. That truly surprised me. Cuomo kept very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many Republicans on the island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred a lot of tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened before the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless the winning alliance failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – was support for Mamdani dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and homeowners supported the independent. Thus there existed a little resistance. However overall, largely the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the vote there was coverage on if Mamdani was gaining ground with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are areas with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, you have newcomers from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but he retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what New York means politically? Will the progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that key political leaders from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I believe that there will be more of that – people will emerge from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I think that every city in America could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities exist.