🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win citywide, and block by block. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become a kind of well-known figure recently for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate would win while failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for clever terms. He highlighted, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in readership and the majority of electors favored the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

What was your night?

I had to do that since they were dropping approximately 200K votes into the system frequently! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups of votes added after that and his lead went from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

You know, it was possible where election day turned out somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which the opponent was going to end up basically doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. But the winner added 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Expanding Support

How did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that the left long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, tenants and individuals facing cost pressures. He improved considerably with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He created the coalition that the left long aimed for: diverse, youthful, renters and people squeezed by affordability

Additionally, there were a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It is a genuine phenomenon, confined to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump previously backed the progressive this year. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Impact

A major development of the night was the record turnout. Who did that help?

Both sides. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I thought it could exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – which is a lot of darn voters. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

You predicted he’d get over 50% of the vote. Is he on course for that?

Right now you would say he’s likely to surpass 50%. He has 50.4% but remain around 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe probable, and I wish he does so then none can claim the Republican was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His vote plummeted.

He didn’t win any district in any area. Including one neighborhood in the borough, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really was unexpected. Cuomo held very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added many Republicans on the island who had a high participation. I think there was significant tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened before the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – was support for Mamdani dominant in those parts of the boroughs?

I think there was some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. So there existed some opposition. However no, largely the leftist base is another huge reason why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

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

There are areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he did well. But in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored Cuomo. And also, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if existed major surprises here, but he did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from the left come from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that we’ll see more of that – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that every city in the US can have their own commie corridor. Cities are the epicenters of leftwing power in the nation – since they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.