🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win citywide, but precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, devoted over a decade in progressive politics and emerged as a kind of well-known figure this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and polling.

He released his extremely precise forecast map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate was victorious while missing Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his newsletter, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for clever terms. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from Park Slope to Bushwick to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate 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 Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in readership and most voters leaned toward Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

What was your night?

It was necessary because they were adding approximately 200K ballots into the tally every few minutes! I was actually a little nervous initially: Mamdani led the initial ballots by 12 points, but there were two big batches of votes added after that and the advantage went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world in which election day went kind of poorly for him, in which Cuomo would have basically doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However Mamdani added half a million supporters to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Coalition Building

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

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, it’s young, tenants and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the primary. Additionally he boosted his core of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

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

Additionally, there were a number of supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It is a real thing, limited to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for the former president previously went for Zohran now. However it’s not that he was winning over white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Impact

One of the big stories of the election was the sky-high turnout. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I thought it could exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

You predicted he’d exceed 50% of the vote. Is he on course for that?

Currently it appears he’s favored to get over 50%. He’s at just over 50% but remain around 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe probable, and I hope he achieves it because afterwards no one can say the Republican was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

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

He lost any district in any area. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump neighborhood. That truly was unexpected. The independent kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained many Republicans on the island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred significant strategic balloting by the Republicans. This happened prior to the former president tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed left-wing base – was support for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas of the boroughs?

I think existed some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. Thus there was a little resistance. However overall, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on if Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but he did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city represents in politics? Will commie corridor serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

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

But I think that each urban center in the US can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of leftwing power in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the disparities exist.