🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a significant forecast – going beyond who would win citywide, and precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst who grew up in New York City, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a well-known figure recently for his thorough analyses into city data and voter surveys.

He released his highly detailed forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the mainstream paper” in readership and the majority of electors favored Cuomo, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that because they were adding approximately 200K ballots into the tally frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani led the initial ballots by 12 points, but there were large groups of votes that came in later and his lead dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world where election day went somewhat badly for him, in which the opponent was going to end up basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. However the winner added 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

How did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, tenants and it’s people facing cost pressures. He gained considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, tenants and people squeezed by affordability

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

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

Voter Participation and Effects

One of the big stories of the election was the record turnout. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured we might exceed two million, but it reached 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Right now it appears he’s favored to get over half. He has 50.4% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted at that time. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I think probable, and I wish he does because then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His vote plummeted.

He lost any district in any borough. Not even one neighborhood in the borough, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really surprised me. The independent held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained many Republicans on the island with a high participation. I believe there was significant strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened before Trump endorsed for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your often-discussed left-wing base – was support for the candidate overwhelming in those parts of the boroughs?

In my view there was some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, for example, the property owners and residents supported the independent. So there was some opposition. But overall, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on if the candidate was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he did?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. But in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance definitely mattered in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were strongly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key figures from the left hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be more of that – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I think that every city in America can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the epicenters of leftwing power in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities we face.