🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant forecast – not just who would win citywide, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and has become something of a local celebrity recently for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for clever terms. He pointed out, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to Bushwick to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the New York Times” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

How was your night?

I had to do that because they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the system frequently! I was actually a little nervous initially: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of ballots added after that and his lead dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible where yesterday went somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which the opponent was going to end up basically doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. But Mamdani gained 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani get additional support from?

He assembled the coalition that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: multiracial, young, renters and people squeezed by affordability

There were also a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is that a big trend?

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported Trump previously went for Zohran now. But it’s not that he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Effects

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

Both sides. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I thought we might exceed 2 million, but it reached 2.3 million – which is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

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

Right now it appears he’s likely to get over half. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still around 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think certain, but I believe probable, and I wish he achieves it so afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win any district in any area. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative neighborhood. That really surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained all of these Republicans on the island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred significant tactical voting by the Republicans. They were doing it prior to the former president tweeted his support for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your often-discussed left-wing base – was support for the candidate dominant in those areas of the boroughs?

I think there was some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there existed a little resistance. But no, mostly the leftist base is a key factor why Zohran won – he was polling between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the vote there was coverage on if the candidate was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he did well. However in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance definitely mattered in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. And also, you have Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly supportive. So it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but he retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city means politically? Will the progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key political leaders from the left come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be more of that – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

However I think that every city in the US can have similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – because youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.