🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a bold electoral prediction – going beyond who would win citywide, but precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in New York City, has spent over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a well-known figure recently for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. He possesses a talent for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal surpass the New York Times” in readership and the majority of electors favored the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

How was your election night?

It was necessary since they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the system frequently! I felt somewhat anxious initially: The candidate was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of votes that came in after that and his lead dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world where yesterday turned out kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which the opponent was going to end up essentially doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. However Mamdani gained half a million supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He went out and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani get additional support from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, tenants and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Plus he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

Additionally, there were a number of supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president last year backed the progressive now. But it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

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

Each candidate. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured we might exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. There was a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed to secure victory.

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

Currently it appears he’s likely to surpass half. He has just over 50% but remain probably 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think certain, but I believe probable, and I wish he does so then none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His vote plummeted.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained all of these Republicans on Staten Island who had a high participation. I think occurred a lot of strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened prior to Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your often-discussed left-wing base – was support for Mamdani dominant in those parts of the boroughs?

In my view there was some weakening of the progressive zone in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and residents supported the independent. So there was some opposition. However overall, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Zohran won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on whether Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. But in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, you have newcomers from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what New York represents in politics? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from the left come from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I believe that there will be additional examples – people will emerge from these areas to be elevated nationally.

However I think that each urban center in the US can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in America – because they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the disparities we face.