🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the New York mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a significant forecast – going beyond who would win overall, but block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, devoted more than ten years in progressive politics and has become a kind of well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and polling.

He released his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani would win while failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. He possesses a talent for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the “commie corridor”, stretching from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, 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 Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in readership and the majority of electors favored Cuomo, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Patterns and Surprises

How was your election night?

I had to do that since they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the tally frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of votes added after that and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world where yesterday went kind of poorly for Mamdani, where Cuomo was going to end up basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. But the winner added half a million supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani get additional support from?

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, tenants and it’s people facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Additionally he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

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

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

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president previously backed the progressive now. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

A major development of the night was the sky-high turnout. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I thought we might go over two million, but it reached 2.3 million – which is a huge number of participants. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to surpass half. He has 50.4% but remain probably 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think certain, but I believe probable, and I wish he achieves it so then no one can say Sliwa was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

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

He lost a single precinct in any borough. Not even Tottenville in the borough, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That truly was unexpected. The independent kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained all of these Republicans on the island with a high participation. I believe there was a lot of tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened before the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome unless the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

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

In my view existed some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there was a little resistance. But no, largely the leftist base is a key factor why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the vote there was coverage on whether the candidate was making inroads with the community. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

Exist areas with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored Cuomo. And also, you have newcomers from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were strongly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters on this one, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city represents in politics? Will commie corridor serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that key figures from the left come from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that there will be additional examples – candidates will emerge from these areas to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that each urban center in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of leftwing power in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where individuals struggle by the disparities we face.