🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a significant forecast – going beyond the winner citywide, but block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a well-known figure this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and polling.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate was victorious although failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He has a flair for clever terms. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in audience and the majority of electors favored the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your election night?

I had to do that since they were adding approximately 200K votes into the system every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but came two big batches of ballots added after that and the advantage went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world in which yesterday turned out somewhat badly for him, where the opponent would have essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. But Mamdani added 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he succeeded. He campaigned and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani gain additional support from?

He assembled the alliance that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he boosted his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

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

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump previously backed the progressive this year. But it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

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

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than anticipated. I thought it could go over two million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a huge number of participants. Existed a decent anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

You predicted he’d get over half the ballots. Is he likely for that?

Currently it appears he’s favored to get over 50%. He has just over 50% but remain around 200K ballots left to report at that time. So I don’t think certain, but I believe it’s likely, and I hope he does so then none can claim the Republican was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

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

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump area. That really surprised me. Cuomo kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added all of these Republicans on the island with a strong turnout. I think occurred significant tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it before Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if the winning alliance failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – was support for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas of the boroughs?

In my view existed a little dilution of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and residents all went for Cuomo. Thus there existed some opposition. But no, largely the leftist base is a key factor why Mamdani won – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the vote there was coverage on whether Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he did?

There are areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like specific locales – where he did well. But in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel was influential there. Likewise in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored Cuomo. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, who were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the another locale by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from progressives hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will emerge from these areas to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that every city in America can have their own commie corridor. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in America – because youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.