🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win citywide, and block by block. Lange, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, has spent over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as a kind of well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and polling.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while missing Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his newsletter, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for clever terms. He pointed out, as an example, the divide between the “commie corridor”, stretching from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the New York Times” in audience and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

It was necessary since they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the system every few minutes! I felt a little nervous initially: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but there were two big batches of ballots added after that and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world in which yesterday went kind of poorly for him, where the opponent was going to end up essentially doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. However the winner gained 500,000 votes to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He built the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, renters and residents struggling with costs

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

It is a genuine phenomenon, confined to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump last year backed the progressive this year. However I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Impact

A major development of the night was the sky-high turnout. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I thought we might exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a substantial opposition group, who were motivated, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Right now it appears he’s favored to surpass half. He has just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots left to report at that time. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he does so afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His support plummeted.

He lost any district in any area. Including Tottenville in the borough, similar to an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. The independent kept Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many conservatives on the island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred a lot of strategic balloting by GOP voters. They were doing it before Trump tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view there was 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 homeowners all went for the independent. So there was some opposition. However no, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he scored between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the vote we reported on whether the candidate was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as specific locales – where he did well. But in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned Cuomo. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were strongly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if there were major surprises here, but Mamdani retained left-leaning areas and even parts of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that key figures from the left come from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – people will emerge from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that each urban center in America can have their own commie corridor. Cities are the centers of leftwing power in America – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.