🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours before the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – going beyond who would win overall, but block by block. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and has become a kind of local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his highly detailed prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although missing the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. He has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in readership and most voters favored the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your election night?

It was necessary because they were dropping around 200,000 ballots into the system every few minutes! I felt a little nervous at the beginning: The candidate was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of votes that came in after that and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, it was possible where yesterday went kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which the opponent would have essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. But Mamdani gained 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he won. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

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

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, tenants and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, 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. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, renters and people squeezed by affordability

There were also a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president last year went for Zohran this year. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

A major development of the night was the sky-high participation. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I thought we might go over 2 million, but it reached 2.3M – which is a huge number of participants. There was a substantial opposition group, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to win.

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

Right now you would say he’s favored to get over half. He has just over 50% but there’s still around 200K ballots uncounted at that time. Thus it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe it’s likely, and I wish he does because then none can claim the Republican was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative neighborhood. That really surprised me. The independent kept Caucasian districts, affluent zones and devout communities, and then added all of these conservatives on the island with a high participation. I think there was significant strategic balloting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to Trump tweeted his support for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – was support for the candidate dominant in those parts of the boroughs?

I think existed some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and homeowners supported Cuomo. So there was some opposition. However overall, largely the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the election there was coverage on whether the candidate was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. But in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance definitely mattered 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 southern Brooklyn, they were strongly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if existed crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city means politically? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest political leaders from the left come from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that there will be additional examples – people will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that every city in America could develop similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.