🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange made a bold electoral prediction – not just who would win overall, but block by block. Lange, a political analyst who grew up in the city, devoted over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a well-known figure recently for his thorough analyses into city data and polling.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for clever terms. He pointed out, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood 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 Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers surpass the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that because they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the tally every few minutes! I was actually a little nervous initially: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups of ballots that came in after that and his lead went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world in which election day went kind of poorly for Mamdani, where Cuomo would have basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. However Mamdani gained 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain additional support from?

He assembled the coalition that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He built the coalition that the left long aimed for: multiracial, young, tenants and people struggling with costs

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

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, confined to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in ethnic enclaves that went for the former president last year went for the progressive this year. But it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Impact

A major development of the election was the sky-high turnout. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than anticipated. I figured we might go over two million, but it reached 2.3M – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s favored to surpass half. He has 50.4% but remain probably 200,000 votes left to report at that time. So it’s not certain, but I believe it’s likely, and I wish he does so afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, is the other big story. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative area. That really surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many Republicans on the island who had a strong turnout. I think there was a lot of strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened before the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

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

In my view existed a little dilution of the progressive zone 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 was some opposition. But overall, largely the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote we reported on whether Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Is there any suggestion that he did?

There are areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Manhattan area, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Likewise in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. And also, there are newcomers from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that key figures from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that each urban center in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the centers of leftwing power in America – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the disparities we face.