🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a significant forecast – not just the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a well-known figure recently for his deep dives into municipal statistics and polling.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate would win while missing the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the split between the “commie corridor”, running from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, where he forecasted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the New York Times” in audience and most voters favored the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that since they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the system frequently! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of ballots that came in later and the advantage went from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible where yesterday turned out somewhat badly for Mamdani, where Cuomo was going to end up basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. But Mamdani gained 500,000 votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani get additional support from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, tenants and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Plus he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He created the coalition that the left long aimed for: multiracial, youthful, tenants and people struggling with costs

Additionally, there were some Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president previously backed Zohran now. But it’s not that he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Impact

One of the big stories of the night was the sky-high participation. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I thought we might go over 2 million, but it reached 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to get over 50%. He has just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted at that time. Thus I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it because then none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

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

He lost a single precinct in any area. Including one neighborhood in the borough, which is like an highly conservative area. That really surprised me. Cuomo kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added many conservatives on the island with a strong turnout. I think occurred a lot of strategic balloting by the Republicans. They were doing it before the former president endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

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

I think there was a little dilution of the progressive zone in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. There, for example, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. Thus there was some opposition. But overall, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on if Mamdani was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – 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. Likewise in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but Mamdani retained left-leaning areas and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

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 political leaders from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will come from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

But I think that each urban center in America could develop their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in America – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.