🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – not just the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, devoted more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and polling.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani would win although missing the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and financial newspapers surpass the New York Times” in readership and the majority of electors favored Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your night?

It was necessary because they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the tally frequently! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of ballots that came in later and his lead went from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world where election day turned out kind of poorly for him, in which Cuomo was going to end up basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. But the winner added half a million votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his base from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain additional support from?

He built the alliance that the left long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he boosted his core of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

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

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

It is a real thing, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president previously backed the progressive this year. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Impact

A major development of the election was the sky-high participation. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than anticipated. I figured we might go over 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 also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Right now you would say he’s favored to surpass 50%. He’s at just over 50% but remain probably 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe it’s likely, and I wish he does so afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

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

He didn’t win any district in any area. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump area. That really was unexpected. Cuomo kept very white areas, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained many Republicans on the island with a high participation. I believe occurred significant tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to the former president endorsed for the candidate, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – was support for Mamdani overwhelming in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, for example, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. So there was a little resistance. But overall, 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 if the candidate was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he did?

There are neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. But in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if there were major surprises here, but he did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives come from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

However I think that every city in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – since they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities exist.