🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours prior to the New York race for mayor, Michael Lange made a bold electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, and precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, devoted more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a well-known figure recently for his thorough analyses into city data and voter surveys.

He released his highly detailed prediction map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate was victorious while failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He highlighted, 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 triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, certain media outlets and financial newspapers outrank the mainstream paper” in audience and most voters favored Cuomo, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

What was your night?

It was necessary because they were adding approximately 200K votes into the system every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of ballots that came in later and his lead went from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

You know, it was possible in which yesterday went kind of poorly for him, where the opponent was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But Mamdani gained half a million supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani get additional support from?

He built the coalition that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, tenants and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the primary. Plus he boosted his base of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He created the coalition that the left long aimed for: multiracial, young, tenants and people squeezed by affordability

There were also a number of supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It is a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that went for the former president last year backed Zohran this year. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

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

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than I had expected. I thought it could exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

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

Right now you would say he’s favored to get over 50%. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still probably 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I believe probable, and I hope he does so then no one can say the Republican was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any area. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That truly was unexpected. The independent kept Caucasian districts, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained many conservatives on Staten Island with a high participation. I think occurred a lot of strategic balloting by the Republicans. This happened before Trump tweeted his support for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your often-discussed left-wing base – was support for Mamdani dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view there was a little dilution of the commie corridor in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the Greek landlords and residents supported the independent. Thus there was a little resistance. But overall, largely the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote we reported on whether the candidate was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he did?

Exist neighborhoods with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance definitely mattered in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were strongly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but Mamdani retained left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what New York means politically? Will the commie corridor serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key figures from progressives hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that there will be more of that – candidates will emerge from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

However I believe that every city in the US can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – because youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities we face.