🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – not just who would win overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani would win while missing Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, 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. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters leaned toward Cuomo, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your night?

I had to do that because they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the system every few minutes! I felt a little nervous initially: Mamdani was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came two big batches of votes that came in later and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, it was possible where election day turned out kind of poorly for Mamdani, where the opponent was going to end up basically doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However the winner added 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He campaigned and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He created the alliance that the left long aimed for: diverse, young, tenants and people struggling with costs

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

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president previously went for the progressive this year. But I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Impact

A major development of the night was the record participation. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I thought it could exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a substantial opposition group, who were motivated, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Right now you would say he’s likely to surpass half. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted at that time. So I don’t think certain, but I believe it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it so then none can claim Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He lost a single precinct in any area. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative neighborhood. That really was unexpected. Cuomo held very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added all of these conservatives on Staten Island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred 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 failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for the candidate dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view there was a little dilution of the progressive zone in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there existed a little resistance. However overall, mostly the leftist base is a key factor why Mamdani won – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the vote we reported on if Mamdani was gaining ground with the community. Any indication that he did?

There are areas with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Likewise in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were strongly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but he retained left-leaning areas and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will the commie corridor serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that key figures from progressives hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that there will be additional examples – candidates will emerge from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that each urban center in America could develop their own commie corridor. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – because youth reside there, people rent and they are places where people are crushed by the inequalities exist.