🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours before the New York race for mayor, Michael Lange made a bold electoral prediction – not just who would win overall, but block by block. Lange, a political analyst who grew up in New York City, devoted more than ten years in left-leaning activism and has become a kind of local celebrity recently for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win although failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would win by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the New York Times” in readership and most voters favored the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your night?

It was necessary because they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the tally every few minutes! I felt a little nervous at the beginning: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups of ballots added later and his lead dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, it was possible in which election day went somewhat badly for Mamdani, where Cuomo was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. However the winner added 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he won. He went out and greatly broadened his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did the mayor-elect gain those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He gained considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

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

It is a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president previously backed the progressive this year. But it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

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

Each candidate. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I thought it could exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

You forecasted he’d exceed 50% of the vote. Is he on course for that?

Right now it appears he’s favored to get over 50%. He has 50.4% but remain probably 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus it’s not certain, but I believe probable, and I hope he does so afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His vote plummeted.

He didn’t win any district in any area. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative neighborhood. That really was unexpected. The independent kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added all of these conservatives on the island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred a lot of strategic balloting by the Republicans. This happened prior to the former president tweeted his support for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your often-discussed left-wing base – did backing for the candidate dominant in those areas of the boroughs?

In my view existed a little dilution of the commie corridor in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported Cuomo. So there was some opposition. But no, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Zohran prevailed – he scored between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

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

Exist neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they all leaned the independent. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were strongly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what New York represents in politics? Will progressive base become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that key figures from progressives hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – people will emerge from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that each urban center in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Cities are the epicenters of leftwing power in America – since youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.