🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, but block by block. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in New York City, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become a kind of well-known figure recently for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He released his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate was victorious although failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. Lange has a flair for clever terms. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors favored the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Trends and Surprises

What was your election night?

It was necessary because they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the system every few minutes! I felt a little nervous initially: The candidate led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups of ballots that came in later and the advantage went from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world in which election day turned out somewhat badly for Mamdani, where Cuomo was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. However Mamdani added 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the first round.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani get additional support from?

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, tenants and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his core 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, young, tenants and people squeezed by affordability

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

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, confined to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Voters in immigrant strongholds that went for the former president last year went for Zohran now. But I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Impact

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

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

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

Currently it appears he’s favored to get over 50%. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still around 200K ballots left to report at that time. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he does because then no one can say the Republican was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Including Tottenville in the borough, which is like an highly conservative area. That really surprised me. The independent kept Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many conservatives on the island with a strong turnout. I believe occurred significant strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your often-discussed “commie corridor” – did backing for the candidate overwhelming in those parts of the boroughs?

I think there was some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the property owners and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there was a little resistance. But no, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Zohran won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

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

Exist areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Manhattan area, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were strongly Cuomo. So I don’t know if there were major surprises on this one, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what New York means politically? Will progressive base become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that key figures from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that there will be additional examples – candidates will emerge from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that each urban center in America could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the epicenters of progressive influence in America – because youth reside there, people rent and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities we face.