🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours prior to the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange made a bold forecast – not just who would win overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in New York City, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and has become something of a local celebrity recently for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win although missing the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, his platform. He has a flair for clever terms. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that because they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the tally every few minutes! I felt a little nervous initially: The candidate led the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of ballots that came in after that and his lead went from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world in which election day went somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo would have essentially doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. But Mamdani added 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He campaigned and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that progressives long aimed for: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He created the alliance that the left long aimed for: diverse, young, renters and people squeezed by affordability

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

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump previously went for the progressive now. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Impact

A major development of the night was the record participation. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I thought it could go over two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

You forecasted he’d get over 50% of the vote. Is he on course for that?

Right now you would say he’s favored to get over half. He’s at 50.4% but remain around 200,000 votes left to report at that time. Thus I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think probable, and I hope he achieves it because then none can claim Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative area. That really was unexpected. The independent held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained all of these conservatives on the island who had a high participation. I believe occurred a lot of strategic balloting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view existed some weakening 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 residents all went for Cuomo. So there was a little resistance. However no, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Zohran won – he scored between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

Prior to the election there was coverage on whether Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist areas with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, there are newcomers from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, who were pretty staunchly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if existed major surprises here, but Mamdani did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city means politically? Will the commie corridor serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest political leaders from the left hail from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I think that each urban center in the US can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – because youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities exist.