🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – not just who would win citywide, and precinct by precinct. The analyst, a political analyst who grew up in the city, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and emerged as a kind of well-known figure this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani would win while missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his newsletter, his platform. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the mainstream paper” in readership and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that because they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the system every few minutes! I was actually a little nervous initially: The candidate led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of ballots added after that and his lead went from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world in which election day went somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo would have essentially increasing his support from the Democratic primary. However the winner 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 primary.

Expanding Support

Where did the mayor-elect gain additional support from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his core of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: multiracial, young, tenants and people struggling with costs

There were also some Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It is a genuine phenomenon, confined to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president last year backed Zohran this year. However it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

A major development of the election was the record turnout. Who did that help?

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured we might exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was also motivated, 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 50%. He has just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted at that time. Thus it’s not certain, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it because then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His support plummeted.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Including one neighborhood in the borough, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really was unexpected. Cuomo kept very white areas, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained many conservatives on Staten Island with a strong turnout. I believe there was significant tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to Trump endorsed for the candidate, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

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

In my view there was some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and homeowners all went for the independent. So there existed a little resistance. However overall, largely the leftist base is another huge reason why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the election we reported on if Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are areas with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as specific locales – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Likewise in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. Plus, you have newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were strongly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city represents in politics? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that key political leaders from progressives hail 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 promoted to higher office.

However I think that every city in America can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – because youth reside there, people rent and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities exist.