🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours prior to the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – not just the winner overall, and precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and has become a kind of local celebrity recently for his thorough analyses into city data and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win although missing Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to Astoria, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani would win by huge margins, 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 leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that because they were dropping around 200,000 ballots into the system every few minutes! I was actually a little nervous at the beginning: The candidate was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came 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 in which yesterday went kind of poorly for Mamdani, where the opponent would have basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. However Mamdani added 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He campaigned and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the primary. Additionally he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that the left long aimed for: multiracial, young, tenants and residents squeezed by affordability

There were also a number of supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump previously went for Zohran this year. But it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Impact

One of the big stories of the election was the record participation. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured we might go over 2 million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Right now you would say he’s likely to get over half. He has 50.4% but remain around 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. So it’s not certain, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he does because afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Not even Tottenville in the borough, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really surprised me. The independent kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained all of these conservatives on the island with a high participation. I believe there was a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it before Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your often-discussed “commie corridor” – was support for Mamdani dominant in those areas of the boroughs?

In my view there was some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. So there was a little resistance. But overall, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran prevailed – he scored between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the vote we reported on if the candidate was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he did?

There are areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance definitely mattered there. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, you have newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, who were strongly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if existed major surprises here, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Political Impact

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

Yes, it’s no coincidence that key figures from progressives hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

However I think that each urban center in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, people rent and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities exist.