🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a significant forecast – going beyond the winner overall, but block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and has become a kind of local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani would win although failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. He possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to another area to a third locale, 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, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the mainstream paper” in audience and most voters leaned toward Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

What was your night?

It was necessary since they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the tally frequently! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani led the initial ballots by 12 points, but came two big batches of ballots that came in later and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, there was a world in which election day turned out kind of poorly for him, where Cuomo was going to end up basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But Mamdani gained 500,000 votes to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Expanding Support

How did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved considerably with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

There were also some supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It’s definitely a real thing, confined to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump last year went for Zohran this year. However it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

A major development of the night was the sky-high participation. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I thought we might exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was equally driven, and that sufficed to win.

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

Right now it appears he’s favored to get over 50%. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still around 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he does because then none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

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

He lost any district in any area. Including Tottenville in the borough, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That truly surprised me. The independent kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained all of these conservatives on the island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it before the former president endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view there was a little dilution of the progressive zone in some areas like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there was some opposition. But no, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani prevailed – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on if Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he did?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. But in the affluent districts such as the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance definitely mattered there. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but he did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest political leaders from the left hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will emerge from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that every city in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in America – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.