🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the New York race for mayor, Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – not just the winner citywide, but block by block. Lange, a political analyst who grew up in New York City, devoted more than ten years in progressive politics and emerged as a kind of local celebrity this year for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and polling.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate was victorious although missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to Astoria, where he predicted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors favored the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

I had to do that because they were adding approximately 200K votes into the tally every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate led the early vote by 12 points, but came large groups of votes that came in after that and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world where election day went kind of poorly for Mamdani, where Cuomo would have essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. But Mamdani gained 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

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

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: multiracial, youthful, tenants and residents squeezed by affordability

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

It is a real thing, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in immigrant strongholds that supported Trump previously backed Zohran this year. But it’s not that he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Impact

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

Both sides. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I thought it could go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

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

Currently you would say 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 believe probable, and I hope he does because afterwards none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His vote plummeted.

He lost any district in any area. Including Tottenville in the borough, which is like an 88% Trump area. That really surprised me. The independent held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added all of these conservatives on the island who had a high participation. I think occurred significant tactical voting by the Republicans. They were doing it prior to Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

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

In my view there was some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there was some opposition. However no, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he scored between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote we reported on if Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – like specific locales – where he did well. But in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential in those places. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they all leaned Cuomo. And also, you have newcomers from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were pretty staunchly supportive. So I don’t know 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 means politically? Will the progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from the left hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – candidates will come from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

But I think that each urban center in the US can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, people rent and they are places where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.