🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, and precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in the city, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a well-known figure recently for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate was victorious while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his newsletter, his platform. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would win by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the mainstream paper” in audience and most voters favored Cuomo, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Patterns and Surprises

How was your night?

I had to do that because they were adding approximately 200K votes into the system frequently! I felt a little nervous initially: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of ballots that came in later and the advantage went from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, there was a world where election day turned out somewhat badly 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 this was critical why he won. He went out and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

How did the mayor-elect get additional support from?

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Plus he further maximized his core of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, tenants and people squeezed by affordability

There were also some Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It’s definitely a real thing, limited to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported Trump previously backed Zohran now. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Effects

A major development of the night was the sky-high participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I thought we might exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to get over 50%. He has 50.4% but remain around 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe probable, and I wish he does because afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Including Tottenville in the borough, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really was unexpected. Cuomo kept Caucasian districts, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained many Republicans on the island who had a high participation. I think occurred significant tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened before 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”

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas of the boroughs?

In my view there was a little dilution of the commie corridor in some areas like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the property owners and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there was a little resistance. But overall, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election we reported on if the candidate was gaining ground 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 performed strongly. But in the affluent districts such as the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance was influential there. Likewise in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in the borough, who were strongly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but he did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

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

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from the left come from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – people will come from these areas to be elevated nationally.

However I believe that every city in America can have their own commie corridor. Cities are the epicenters of leftwing power in America – because youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.