🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – going beyond the winner citywide, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, a political analyst born and raised in New York City, devoted more than ten years in progressive politics and emerged as something of a well-known figure this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although missing 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 divide between the “commie corridor”, running from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in readership and the majority of electors leaned toward Cuomo, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that since they were dropping approximately 200K votes into the tally frequently! I was actually a little nervous at the beginning: The candidate led the early vote by 12 points, but there were large groups of ballots that came in after that and the advantage went from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible where election day turned out somewhat badly for him, in which the opponent would have basically doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However Mamdani added half a million votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and massively expanded his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

How did the mayor-elect gain additional support from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved considerably with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the primary. Additionally he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He created the alliance that the left long aimed for: multiracial, youthful, renters and people struggling with costs

There were also some supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, confined to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president last year backed Zohran now. However it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Impact

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

Both sides. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured we might exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a huge number of participants. Existed a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

You predicted he’d exceed 50% of the vote. Is he on course for that?

Currently you would say he’s favored to surpass 50%. He has 50.4% but there’s still around 200,000 votes left to report at that time. Thus I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it because then none can claim the Republican was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. Cuomo held very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many Republicans on the island who had a strong turnout. I believe occurred a lot of strategic balloting by the Republicans. They were doing it before Trump tweeted his support for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for the candidate dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view existed a little dilution of the commie corridor in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported Cuomo. So there existed some opposition. However overall, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he scored between 77% and 83% in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

Prior to the election there was coverage on if the candidate was making inroads with the community. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Manhattan area, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed major surprises here, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will the progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that key figures from the left come from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that there will be more of that – people will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I think that each urban center in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – because they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities we face.