🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – going beyond the winner citywide, and precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as a kind of local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the New York Times” in readership and most voters favored Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your night?

I had to do that since they were dropping around 200,000 ballots into the tally every few minutes! I felt a little nervous at the beginning: Mamdani led the early vote by 12 points, but came large groups of ballots added after that and his lead went from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, it was possible where election day turned out somewhat badly for him, in which the opponent was going to end up basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. But Mamdani added half a million votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He campaigned and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: diverse racially, youthful, tenants and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Plus he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He created the alliance that the left long aimed for: multiracial, youthful, tenants and people struggling with costs

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

It is a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported Trump last year went for Zohran this year. However I wouldn’t say he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Turnout and Impact

A major development of the election was the sky-high participation. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I thought we might go over two million, but it reached 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

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

Currently it appears he’s likely to get over half. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still around 200K ballots uncounted at that time. Thus it’s not certain, but I think probable, and I wish he does so then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His vote completely collapsed.

He lost a single precinct in any area. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. Cuomo held very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added all of these conservatives on the island with a high participation. I believe there was a lot of tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for the candidate overwhelming in those areas of the boroughs?

In my view existed some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for Cuomo. So there was some opposition. However no, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran prevailed – he scored between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election we reported on whether Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are areas with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he did well. But in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Likewise in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored Cuomo. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but Mamdani retained left-leaning areas and even parts of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will the progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from progressives come from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – people will emerge from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that each urban center in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where people are crushed by the disparities exist.