🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours prior to the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a bold forecast – not just the winner citywide, and block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and has become a kind of local celebrity recently for his thorough analyses into city data and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors favored the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

What was your night?

I had to do that since they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the system every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious initially: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of ballots that came in after that and the advantage went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, it was possible where election day went kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which the opponent would have essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. But the winner gained half a million supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He went out and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

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

He assembled the coalition that the left long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: multiracial, youthful, tenants and residents struggling with costs

There were also a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump previously backed Zohran now. But it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

One of the big stories of the night was the sky-high participation. Who did that help?

Both sides. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured we might go over two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to surpass 50%. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus it’s not it’s definitive, but I think probable, and I hope he does because afterwards none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, is the other big story. His support completely collapsed.

He lost any district in any borough. Not even Tottenville in the borough, which is like an highly conservative neighborhood. That truly surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many conservatives on the island with a strong turnout. I believe there was a lot of tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed “commie corridor” – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view existed some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there was some opposition. However overall, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani won – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote we reported on whether Mamdani was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he did?

There are neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored Cuomo. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were pretty staunchly supportive. So I don’t know if existed major surprises on this one, but he retained left-leaning areas and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that every city in the US can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.