🔗 Share this article

Only two days before the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a bold forecast – going beyond the winner overall, but block by block. Lange, a political analyst who grew up in New York City, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a well-known figure recently for his deep dives into municipal statistics and polling.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win while failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. He possesses a talent for clever terms. He pointed out, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (accurately) that Mamdani would win by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the New York Times” in readership and most voters favored the independent, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Surprises

How was your night?

It was necessary since they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the system frequently! I was actually a little nervous initially: Mamdani led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came two big batches of votes that came in later and the advantage dropped from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world where yesterday went somewhat badly for him, where the opponent would have essentially 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 succeeded. He campaigned and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani get additional support from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his core of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He created the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: multiracial, youthful, tenants and people squeezed by affordability

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

It’s definitely a real thing, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump last year backed the progressive now. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Impact

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

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I thought it could exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

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

Currently it appears he’s favored to surpass 50%. He has just over 50% but remain around 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it because afterwards no one can say the Republican was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His vote completely collapsed.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Including Tottenville in the borough, similar to an 88% Trump neighborhood. That truly was unexpected. The independent kept very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many conservatives on the island with a high participation. I believe occurred significant tactical voting by the Republicans. They were doing it prior to Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your often-discussed left-wing base – did backing for the candidate overwhelming in those parts of the boroughs?

In my view existed some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there existed some opposition. But no, largely the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the election there was coverage on if the candidate was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts such as the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance was influential in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, you have newcomers from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were pretty staunchly Cuomo. So I don’t know if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he did hold left-leaning areas and even parts of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key political leaders from progressives come from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – candidates will come from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

However I believe that every city in America can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the epicenters of leftwing power in America – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.