🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold electoral prediction – going beyond the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in the city, devoted more than ten years in left-leaning activism and has become a kind of well-known figure recently for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. Lange has a flair for clever terms. He pointed out, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (accurately) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the New York Times” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your night?

It was necessary because they were adding approximately 200K ballots into the tally every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani led the initial ballots by 12 points, but there were large groups of ballots that came in later and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world where yesterday went kind of poorly for him, where Cuomo would have essentially doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. However Mamdani added half a million votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and greatly broadened his base from the primary.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He built the alliance that the left long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, tenants and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Plus he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

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

Additionally, there were some Trump/Mamdani voters – is that a big trend?

It is a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president last year backed the progressive this year. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

One of the big stories of the night was the sky-high turnout. Who benefited?

Both sides. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured it could exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – that is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that sufficed to win.

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

Right now you would say he’s favored to get over half. He’s at just over 50% but remain around 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it because afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

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

He lost any district in any area. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an 88% Trump area. That really was unexpected. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained many conservatives on the island with a high participation. I think occurred a lot of strategic balloting by the Republicans. They were doing it before Trump endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for the candidate dominant in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was a little dilution of the progressive zone in some areas like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for Cuomo. So there was a little resistance. However no, largely the leftist base is another huge reason why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the vote we reported on whether Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if there were major surprises on this one, but Mamdani did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what New York represents in politics? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key figures from the left come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that every city in America could develop their own commie corridor. Cities are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – because youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.