🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours prior to the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a bold forecast – not just who would win overall, and precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and has become something of a local celebrity this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He released his highly detailed forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to another area to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in readership and most voters favored the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

I had to do that since they were adding around 200,000 votes into the tally every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of ballots added later and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world where yesterday turned out somewhat badly for him, in which the opponent was going to end up basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. But Mamdani added half a million supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

How did the mayor-elect get those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained considerably with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he boosted his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: multiracial, youthful, tenants and people struggling with costs

There were also a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported Trump previously went for the progressive this year. But it’s not that he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

A major development of the election was the record participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured we might go over two million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

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

Currently it appears he’s favored to get over half. He has 50.4% but remain around 200,000 votes uncounted as of Wednesday morning. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it so then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His vote completely collapsed.

He lost any district in any borough. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. The independent held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added many conservatives on the island who had a high participation. I believe there was significant tactical voting by the Republicans. 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 failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for the candidate 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 older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for the independent. So there was a little resistance. But no, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the vote we reported on whether Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he did well. But in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance definitely mattered there. Similarly in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they all leaned Cuomo. And also, you have newcomers from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if existed major surprises here, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what New York means politically? Will progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from the left hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I think that every city in America could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of leftwing power in America – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where individuals struggle by the disparities we face.