🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – not just who would win citywide, but block by block. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a local celebrity this year for his thorough analyses into city data and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. Lange has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to another area to a third locale, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would win by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in audience and most voters favored Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that because they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the tally frequently! I felt somewhat anxious initially: The candidate was ahead the early vote by 12 points, but there were two big batches of ballots added later and his lead dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, there was a world where yesterday turned out kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo would have basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. However the winner added half a million supporters to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did the mayor-elect gain additional support from?

He built the coalition that progressives long aimed for: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his core of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He created the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse, young, tenants and residents struggling with costs

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

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president last year went for Zohran now. However I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

A major development of the election was the sky-high turnout. Who did that help?

Both sides. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I figured we might go over two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Right now you would say he’s likely to get over half. He has 50.4% but there’s still probably 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. Thus it’s not certain, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it because then none can claim Sliwa was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really was unexpected. The independent kept very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained all of these Republicans on the island with a high participation. I think occurred a lot of tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened before the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless the winning alliance failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for the candidate overwhelming in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think existed a little dilution of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the Greek landlords and residents supported the independent. Thus there existed some opposition. However no, largely the leftist base is a key factor why Zohran won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on whether the candidate was making inroads with the community. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. But in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. And also, there are newcomers from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what the city means politically? Will the progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that key political leaders from progressives come from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I think that each urban center in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of leftwing power in America – because youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.