🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours before the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange made a bold forecast – not just who would win overall, and block by block. Lange, a political analyst who grew up in New York City, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani 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 outrank the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

How was your election night?

It was necessary since they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the tally every few minutes! I was actually a little nervous at the beginning: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but there were two big batches of votes that came in after that and the advantage dropped from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world where election day went kind of poorly for Mamdani, where Cuomo was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But the winner gained 500,000 votes to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the first round.

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He created the alliance that the left always wanted to build: multiracial, youthful, tenants and people squeezed by affordability

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

It is a real thing, confined to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump last year went for the progressive now. 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 record turnout. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I thought it could go over two million, but it reached 2.3 million – that is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

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

Right now you would say he’s likely to surpass half. He has just over 50% but remain probably 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think certain, but I believe it’s likely, and I wish he does so afterwards no one can say the Republican was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He lost a single precinct in any borough. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really surprised me. Cuomo kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added many Republicans on Staten Island who had a high participation. I believe occurred a lot of tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – was support for the candidate dominant in those areas of the boroughs?

I think there was a little dilution of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there existed some opposition. But overall, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between 77% and 83% in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote we reported on whether Mamdani was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he did well. But in the affluent districts 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 favored Cuomo. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were strongly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if existed crazy narrative-busters on this one, 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 the city means politically? Will the commie corridor serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from the left come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these areas to be elevated nationally.

However I think that every city in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of leftwing power in America – because they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities we face.