🔗 Share this article

Only two days before the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a significant forecast – not just who would win overall, and precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and has become something of a well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and polling.

He released his highly detailed forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win although failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. He possesses a talent for clever terms. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the “commie corridor”, stretching from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in audience and the majority of electors favored the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

I had to do that since they were adding approximately 200K ballots into the system frequently! I was actually a little nervous initially: Mamdani led the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of ballots that came in after that and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world in which election day went somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which the opponent was going to end up essentially doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. But Mamdani gained half a million votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he won. He went out and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Coalition Building

How did the mayor-elect gain additional support from?

He built the alliance that the left long aimed for: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: multiracial, young, renters and people squeezed by affordability

There were also a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump last year went for Zohran now. But it’s not that he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Impact

A major development of the election was the sky-high participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I thought it could exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a substantial opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed 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’s at just over 50% but remain probably 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it so afterwards none can claim the Republican was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, is the other big story. His vote plummeted.

He lost a single precinct in any area. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really was unexpected. The independent held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and devout communities, and then added many conservatives on the island who had a high participation. I think occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened before Trump endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think existed some weakening of the progressive zone in some areas like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the property owners and residents all went for Cuomo. So there was a little resistance. However overall, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani won – he was polling between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on if the candidate was gaining ground with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are areas with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential there. Similarly in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored Cuomo. And also, there are newcomers from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were strongly supportive. So it’s unclear if there were major surprises here, but he did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what New York represents in politics? Will the progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest political leaders from the left hail from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – people will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

However I think that each urban center in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Cities are the epicenters of progressive influence in America – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.