🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange made a bold electoral prediction – not just the winner citywide, but block by block. The analyst, a political analyst born and raised in the city, devoted over a decade in progressive politics and emerged as a kind of well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He released his highly detailed prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph 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 New York Times” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward Cuomo, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Patterns and Surprises

What was your night?

I had to do that since they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the system frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: The candidate led the early vote by 12 points, but there were large groups of votes that came in after that and the advantage dropped from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible where yesterday went somewhat badly for him, where the opponent would have essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However Mamdani added half a million votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the primary.

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani gain additional support from?

He assembled the coalition that the left long aimed for: diverse racially, youthful, tenants and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Additionally he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

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

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

It is a real thing, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump previously went for Zohran now. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Impact

A major development of the election was the sky-high turnout. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I figured it could go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to get over 50%. He has 50.4% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted at that time. So I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it because afterwards none can claim the Republican was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His vote completely collapsed.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump area. That truly was unexpected. The independent kept very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added many conservatives on Staten Island who had a strong turnout. I think there was a lot of strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened prior to the former president tweeted his support for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome unless the winning alliance failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed “commie corridor” – was support for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think existed a little dilution of the commie corridor in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and residents all went for the independent. So there was some opposition. However overall, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election we reported on if Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he did?

There are neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential there. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. And also, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly supportive. So it’s unclear if there were major surprises on this one, but he retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

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

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest figures from the left hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that there will be additional examples – candidates will emerge from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

However I think that each urban center in America can have their own commie corridor. Cities are the centers of leftwing power in the nation – because they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.