🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the New York mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, but block by block. The analyst, a political analyst born and raised in the city, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into city data and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win while failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the “commie corridor”, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors favored the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that because they were dropping approximately 200K votes into the tally every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups 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 kind of poorly for Mamdani, where the opponent was going to end up essentially doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. However the winner added 500,000 votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the first round.

Coalition Building

How did the mayor-elect get those extra votes from?

He assembled the alliance that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Plus he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He created the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse, young, renters and residents squeezed by affordability

Additionally, there were some supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It is a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president previously went for Zohran now. However it’s not that he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Impact

One of the big stories of the election was the sky-high participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I figured we might go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – which is a huge number of participants. There was a substantial opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently it appears he’s likely to get over 50%. He has 50.4% but there’s still probably 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it because then none can claim the Republican was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

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

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That truly surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added all of these conservatives on the island who had a high participation. I believe occurred a lot of tactical voting by the Republicans. They were doing it prior to Trump endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome if the winning alliance failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – was support for Mamdani overwhelming in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think existed some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and residents all went for Cuomo. Thus there existed some opposition. However overall, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

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

There are neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts such as the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential there. Similarly in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were strongly supportive. So it’s unclear if there were major surprises on this one, but he did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will the commie corridor become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest 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 areas to be elevated nationally.

But I think that every city in America could develop similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in America – since youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where people are crushed by the inequalities exist.