🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a bold electoral prediction – not just who would win citywide, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections 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 polling.

He released his highly detailed forecast map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate was victorious while failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. He has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the mainstream paper” in readership and the majority of electors leaned toward Cuomo, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

How was your election night?

It was necessary since they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the tally every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: The candidate led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups of votes added after that and the advantage went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, it was possible where yesterday went kind of poorly for him, where Cuomo was going to end up basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. However the winner gained half a million supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

How did Mamdani gain additional support from?

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, tenants 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 further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

Additionally, there were some Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It is a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump previously went for Zohran this year. But it’s not that he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

One of the big stories of the night was the record participation. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I thought it could go over two million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to win.

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

Right now it appears he’s favored to get over half. He has 50.4% but remain around 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus it’s not certain, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he does because afterwards no one can say the Republican was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

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

He lost any district in any area. Not even one neighborhood in the borough, similar to an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. The independent kept very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added all of these Republicans on Staten Island who had a strong turnout. I believe occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your often-discussed left-wing base – was support for Mamdani dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view existed some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. Thus there was a little resistance. But overall, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran won – he scored between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election we reported on whether the candidate was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he did?

There are neighborhoods with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. But in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential there. Similarly in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what New York means politically? Will the progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I think that every city in the US can have similar progressive hubs. Cities are the epicenters of leftwing power in the nation – because they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities we face.