🔗 Share this article

Only two days before the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – going beyond the winner citywide, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and has become something of a local celebrity recently for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win while failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (accurately) that Mamdani would win by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

How was your election night?

It was necessary since they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the tally every few minutes! I was actually a little nervous at the beginning: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but came two big batches of ballots added later and his lead dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible where yesterday went kind of poorly for Mamdani, where the opponent was going to end up basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But Mamdani added 500,000 supporters to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

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

He assembled the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, tenants and individuals facing cost pressures. He improved considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. 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 the left long aimed for: diverse, young, renters and people squeezed by affordability

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

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for the former president last year went for Zohran this year. However I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

One of the big stories of the night was the record turnout. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured we might exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently it appears he’s likely to surpass half. He has 50.4% but remain probably 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. So it’s not certain, but I think probable, and I hope he does so afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative area. That truly was unexpected. The independent held very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many Republicans on Staten Island who had a strong turnout. I believe occurred significant tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened before Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – was support for the candidate overwhelming in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

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, for example, the property owners and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there existed a little resistance. However overall, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Zohran prevailed – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the election there was coverage on if Mamdani was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist 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 definitely mattered there. Similarly in the moderate communities like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they all leaned Cuomo. And also, there are newcomers from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what New York means politically? Will commie corridor serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I believe that there will be more of that – people will come from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that every city in America could develop their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of leftwing power in the nation – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities exist.