🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours prior to the New York mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant forecast – going beyond who would win overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst who grew up in the city, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a local celebrity recently for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win while missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He possesses a talent for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani would win by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your night?

It was necessary since they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the system every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: Mamdani led the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of ballots added later and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, there was a world in which election day turned out somewhat badly for him, where the opponent would have basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But Mamdani added 500,000 supporters to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Expanding Support

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

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, tenants and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

Additionally, there were some Trump/Mamdani voters – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, confined to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for the former president last year backed Zohran this year. However I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

One of the big stories of the election was the record participation. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured we might go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s favored to surpass half. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. So it’s not certain, but I believe probable, and I wish he achieves it so then no one can say the Republican was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any area. Including one neighborhood in the borough, similar to an 88% Trump area. That truly was unexpected. The independent kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added many Republicans on the island who had a high participation. I think there was significant strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened before the former president tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your often-discussed left-wing base – was support for the candidate overwhelming in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view existed some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, for example, the property owners and homeowners all went for Cuomo. So there was some opposition. However overall, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he scored between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the election we reported on if Mamdani was gaining ground with the community. Any indication that he did?

There are neighborhoods with many 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 more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, you have newcomers from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were strongly supportive. So it’s unclear if existed major surprises here, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from progressives come from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will come from these areas to be elevated nationally.

But I think that each urban center in the US can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in America – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities exist.