🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – not just who would win overall, but block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and emerged as a kind of local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He released his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although missing the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by large leads, 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 favored Cuomo, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

How was your night?

I had to do that since they were adding approximately 200K votes into the system every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: Mamdani led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups of votes added later and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world where election day turned out kind of poorly for him, in which the opponent was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. However Mamdani gained half a million votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

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

He assembled the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved considerably with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Plus he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He created the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse, young, tenants and residents struggling with costs

There were also a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president previously went for the progressive now. But it’s not that he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Impact

A major development of the election was the record participation. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I thought it could exceed 2 million, but it reached 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a substantial anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to get over 50%. He’s at 50.4% but there’s still around 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think probable, and I hope he does because then none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, is the other big story. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really was unexpected. Cuomo kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained many Republicans on Staten Island who had a high participation. I believe there was a lot of tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened prior to Trump endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome unless the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – was support for Mamdani dominant in those areas of the boroughs?

I think there was some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there was some opposition. But no, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Zohran won – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the vote there was coverage on if the candidate was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he did?

There are areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel was influential there. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, who were strongly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if existed major surprises on this one, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what New York represents in politics? Will the commie corridor become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from the left hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – people will emerge from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that every city in America could develop their own commie corridor. Cities are the epicenters of leftwing power in the nation – because youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the disparities exist.