🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a bold forecast – not just who would win citywide, but precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in the city, has spent over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a local celebrity this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He released his highly detailed prediction map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate would win while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his newsletter, his platform. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would win 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 readership and the majority of electors leaned toward Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

How was your night?

It was necessary because they were adding approximately 200K ballots into the system every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but there were large groups of ballots added after that and the advantage went from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, it was possible in which yesterday turned out somewhat badly for Mamdani, where Cuomo would have essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. But the winner gained half a million votes to his initial base, and this was critical why he succeeded. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the first round.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani get additional support from?

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Plus he boosted his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He created the alliance that progressives long aimed for: multiracial, young, renters and people struggling with costs

There were also some supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It is a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported Trump last year backed Zohran this year. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Turnout and Effects

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

Both sides. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I thought it could exceed 2 million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. There was a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

You forecasted he’d get over half the ballots. Is he on course for that?

Right now you would say he’s favored to surpass 50%. He has 50.4% but remain around 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. So it’s not certain, but I think probable, and I wish he does so then none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

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

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really was unexpected. Cuomo kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained many Republicans on Staten Island with a high participation. I think occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for the candidate overwhelming in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was a little dilution of the progressive zone in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there existed some opposition. However no, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Zohran prevailed – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election we reported on if the candidate was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, who were strongly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key figures from progressives hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – candidates will emerge from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

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