🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold electoral prediction – going beyond the winner citywide, and precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up 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 city data and polling.

He published his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win although failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, as an example, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to another area to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani would win by large leads, 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 the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your night?

It was necessary because they were adding approximately 200K ballots into the system every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of ballots added later and the advantage went from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

You know, it was possible where yesterday went kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo was going to end up essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. But the winner gained 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, tenants and individuals squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the primary. Additionally he further maximized his core of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse, young, tenants and people squeezed by affordability

There were also some supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It’s definitely a real thing, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump previously backed the progressive this year. But it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

One of the big stories of the night was the record participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I thought we might exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

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

Right now it appears he’s likely to surpass 50%. He has just over 50% but remain around 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. So I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, 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 support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative neighborhood. That really was unexpected. The independent kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained many conservatives on Staten Island with a high participation. I think there was significant tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to Trump tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome unless the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your often-discussed “commie corridor” – was support for the candidate dominant in those areas of the boroughs?

In my view there was a little dilution of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the Greek landlords and residents supported Cuomo. Thus there was a little resistance. But no, mostly the leftist base is a key factor why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the vote we reported on whether Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, who were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city means politically? Will commie corridor serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that key figures from progressives hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be more of that – candidates will emerge from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I think that each urban center in the US can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in America – because they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where people are crushed by the disparities exist.