🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – not just the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in New York City, devoted over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a local celebrity this year for his thorough analyses into city data and polling.

He released his extremely precise forecast map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate was victorious while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the “commie corridor”, stretching from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (accurately) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, “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 conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

It was necessary since they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the tally every few minutes! I felt a little nervous initially: The candidate led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of votes added after that and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world where election day went kind of poorly for him, in which the opponent would have essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. However Mamdani gained half a million supporters to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He campaigned and massively expanded his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, tenants and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Plus he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

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

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

Voter Participation and Effects

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

Each candidate. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured we might exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

You predicted he’d exceed half the ballots. Is he on course for that?

Currently you would say he’s favored to get over half. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think certain, but I think probable, and I wish he does because then none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, is the other big story. His support plummeted.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump area. That truly was unexpected. Cuomo kept very white areas, affluent zones and devout communities, and then added all of these Republicans on Staten Island with a high participation. I think occurred significant tactical voting by GOP voters. 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 unless the winning alliance failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your often-discussed left-wing base – did backing for the candidate dominant in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was a little dilution of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported the independent. So there existed some opposition. But overall, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote there was coverage on whether Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he did?

Exist neighborhoods with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. But in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance definitely mattered there. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, there are newcomers from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. So I don’t know if there were major surprises here, but he retained left-leaning areas and even parts of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city represents in politics? Will the commie corridor serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

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

However I believe that each urban center in the US can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the epicenters of leftwing power in the nation – because they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities exist.