🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – going beyond the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst who grew up in the city, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and has become a kind of well-known figure recently for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although missing the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the “commie corridor”, running from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in readership and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your night?

It was necessary because they were adding around 200,000 votes into the system frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of ballots added later and his lead went from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, there was a world where election day went kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. However the winner gained 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his base from the first round.

Expanding Support

How did the mayor-elect get additional support from?

He assembled the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: multiracial, youthful, renters and residents struggling with costs

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

It is a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported Trump previously backed the progressive now. However I wouldn’t say he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Turnout and Effects

A major development of the election was the record turnout. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I figured it could exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. Existed a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

You forecasted he’d exceed 50% of the vote. Is he likely for that?

Right now it appears he’s likely to surpass half. He has 50.4% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted at that time. Thus I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think probable, and I hope he achieves it so then none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His vote plummeted.

He lost any district in any area. Not even Tottenville in the borough, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really surprised me. The independent kept very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many conservatives on the island who had a high participation. I believe there was a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened before the former president endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome unless the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your often-discussed “commie corridor” – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those parts of the boroughs?

I think existed some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there existed some opposition. But no, largely the leftist base is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the vote we reported on if the candidate was gaining ground with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. But in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, who were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what New York represents in politics? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s not accidental that key political leaders from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I believe 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 America could develop similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities exist.