🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the New York race for mayor, Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, and precinct by precinct. The analyst, a political analyst who grew up in the city, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as a kind of local celebrity recently for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win while failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. He has a flair for clever terms. He pointed out, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that Mamdani would win by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, certain media outlets and financial newspapers outrank the New York Times” in readership and most voters favored Cuomo, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Surprises

What was your election night?

It was necessary because they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the tally every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate led the early vote by 12 points, but came two big batches of votes added later and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world where yesterday went kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo was going to end up basically doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. However 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 first round.

Coalition Building

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

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He improved considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Additionally he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

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

Additionally, there were a number of supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for the former president last year backed the progressive now. However I wouldn’t say he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Impact

A major development of the night was the record participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Turnout was significantly higher than anticipated. I thought it could go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

You forecasted he’d exceed 50% of the vote. 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 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it because then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Not even Tottenville in the borough, which is like an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. The independent held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added all of these conservatives on Staten Island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened prior to the former president tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for the candidate dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think existed some weakening of the progressive zone in some areas like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and residents supported the independent. Thus there was some opposition. But overall, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran won – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the election we reported on whether Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he did?

There are areas with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored Cuomo. Plus, there are newcomers from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, who were strongly Cuomo. So I don’t know if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he did hold left-leaning areas and even parts of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

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

Yes, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest figures from progressives hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that each urban center in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in America – since youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.