🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange made a bold electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a local celebrity recently for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. He has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the “commie corridor”, stretching from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, where he forecasted (correctly) 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 readership and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Surprises

What was your election night?

It was necessary because they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the tally frequently! I was actually a little nervous initially: The candidate led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but came two big batches of ballots that came in after that and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, there was a world where election day turned out somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo was going to end up basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. However the winner gained 500,000 supporters to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He went out and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Coalition Building

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

He assembled the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He improved considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

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

There were also some Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It is a real thing, confined to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president previously backed Zohran now. But it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

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

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

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to surpass half. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still probably 200,000 votes uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he does because afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His vote plummeted.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really was unexpected. The independent kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained many conservatives on Staten Island with a high participation. I think there was significant tactical voting by the Republicans. They were doing it before the former president tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless the winning alliance failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – was support for the candidate overwhelming in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view there was some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported the independent. So there was some opposition. But overall, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the election there was coverage on if Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he did?

Exist neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. But in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were strongly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if existed major surprises here, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the another locale by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city means politically? Will progressive base become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that key figures from progressives hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – people will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that each urban center in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of leftwing power in the nation – because they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.