🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold electoral prediction – not just who would win overall, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, devoted more than ten years in progressive politics and emerged as a kind of well-known figure this year for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his newsletter, his platform. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, 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 surpass the New York Times” in audience and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your night?

It was necessary because they were adding approximately 200K votes into the system frequently! I felt a little nervous at the beginning: Mamdani was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups of votes that came in later and his lead dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world where election day went kind of poorly for Mamdani, where the opponent was going to end up basically doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However Mamdani gained half a million supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the primary.

Coalition Building

Where did the mayor-elect gain those extra votes from?

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, tenants and individuals squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Additionally he boosted his core of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, renters and people squeezed by affordability

Additionally, there were a number of supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, confined to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that supported Trump last year backed the progressive this year. But I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Turnout and Effects

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

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than I had expected. I thought it could exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but his supporters was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

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

Right now it appears he’s likely to surpass half. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still around 200K ballots uncounted at that time. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe it’s likely, and I hope he does because then no one can say the Republican was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

The GOP candidate, the conservative contender, is the other big story. His vote completely collapsed.

He lost any district in any area. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump area. That really was unexpected. Cuomo kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added all of these conservatives on the island who had a strong turnout. I think there was significant tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas 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. There, instance, the property owners and homeowners supported Cuomo. So there existed some opposition. But overall, largely the leftist base is a key factor why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the vote we reported on if the candidate was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like specific locales – where he did well. But in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the moderate communities like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. Plus, you have newcomers from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were strongly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what New York represents in politics? Will commie corridor serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – people will emerge from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

However I think that each urban center in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities we face.