🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours before the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – not just who would win overall, and precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, devoted more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a well-known figure this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and polling.

He published his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. He possesses a talent for clever terms. He pointed out, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from Park Slope to Bushwick 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. In those areas, “the Free Press and financial newspapers surpass the New York Times” in readership and the majority of electors leaned toward Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Patterns and Surprises

How was your night?

I had to do that since they were adding approximately 200K votes into the system frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: Mamdani was ahead the early vote by 12 points, but there were large groups of ballots added later and his lead went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible where yesterday turned out somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which the opponent was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But the winner added half a million votes to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the primary.

Coalition Building

How did the mayor-elect gain additional support from?

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, tenants and individuals squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he boosted his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, renters and residents squeezed by affordability

Additionally, there were some supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, confined to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump last year went for Zohran now. However it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

One of the big stories of the night was the sky-high participation. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I figured it could exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that was enough to secure victory.

You forecasted he’d get over half the ballots. Is he likely for that?

Currently it appears he’s favored to get over 50%. He’s at 50.4% but there’s still probably 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think probable, and I hope he achieves it so then none can claim Sliwa was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His vote plummeted.

He lost any district in any borough. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That truly was unexpected. Cuomo kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added many Republicans on the island who had a high participation. I think there was a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened before the former president tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome unless Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for Mamdani overwhelming in those parts of the boroughs?

In my view existed some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. There, for example, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. So there was a little resistance. But no, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election we reported on if Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he did?

There are neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. But in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance was influential there. Likewise in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were strongly supportive. So it’s unclear if there were major surprises on this one, but Mamdani did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will the commie corridor become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest figures from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that there will be additional examples – people will come from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that every city in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.