🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours prior to the New York mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, devoted over a decade in progressive politics and emerged as a kind of local celebrity recently for his thorough analyses into city data and polling.

He published his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani would win although missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. He has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

It was necessary since they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the system every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of votes that came in later and his lead went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world in which election day went somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo would have basically doubling his votes from the earlier contest. But the winner gained 500,000 supporters to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, tenants and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Plus he boosted his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, renters and residents struggling with costs

Additionally, there were a number of supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It is a real thing, confined to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported Trump last year went for the progressive now. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

One of the big stories of the election was the sky-high turnout. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I thought it could exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

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

Currently it appears he’s favored to surpass 50%. He’s at 50.4% but there’s still probably 200K ballots left to report at that time. So I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it because then none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any area. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really surprised me. The independent kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added all of these conservatives on Staten Island with a high participation. I believe occurred a lot of strategic balloting by the Republicans. 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 if Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

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

In my view there was some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. So there existed a little resistance. But no, largely the leftist base is a key factor why Zohran won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote there was coverage on if Mamdani was gaining ground with the community. Is there any suggestion that he did?

There are neighborhoods with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Likewise in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they all leaned the independent. And also, you have newcomers from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were strongly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but he retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what New York means politically? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. 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 each urban center in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where individuals struggle by the disparities we face.