🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours prior to the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, and block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, has spent over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as a kind of local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win while failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, as an example, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, certain media outlets and financial newspapers surpass the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your election night?

It was necessary because they were adding around 200,000 votes into the tally every few minutes! 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 after that and the advantage went from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world in which election day turned out kind of poorly for Mamdani, where Cuomo was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But the winner gained half a million votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and greatly broadened his support from the primary.

Coalition Building

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

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Plus he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: multiracial, youthful, tenants and people struggling with costs

Additionally, there were a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It’s definitely a real thing, limited to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump last year went for the progressive this year. But I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

One of the big stories of the election was the record turnout. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I thought it could go over two million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

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

Right now you would say he’s favored to surpass half. He’s at 50.4% but remain around 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe probable, and I wish he does because then none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

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

He lost a single precinct in any area. Including Tottenville in the borough, similar to an 88% Trump area. That truly surprised me. Cuomo kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added many Republicans on the island who had a strong turnout. I think there was a lot of strategic balloting by the Republicans. This happened prior to Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed “commie corridor” – was support for the candidate dominant in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view existed some weakening of the progressive zone in some areas like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, for example, the property owners and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there existed a little resistance. However no, mostly the leftist base is a key factor why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote we reported on if the candidate was making inroads with the community. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are areas with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. But in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Manhattan area, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were strongly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Political Impact

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

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives come from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – people will emerge from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

However I believe that each urban center in America could develop their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – because they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.