🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – going beyond who would win overall, and block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and emerged as a kind of well-known figure recently for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate was victorious while failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, the Narrative War. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the “commie corridor”, stretching from one neighborhood to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (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 financial newspapers surpass the New York Times” in readership and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

How was your election night?

It was necessary because they were adding around 200,000 votes into the tally frequently! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate led the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of votes added after that and his lead went from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, it was possible where election day turned out kind of poorly for him, in which Cuomo was going to end up essentially doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. But the winner added 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 first round.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his core of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

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

There were also some supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It’s definitely a real thing, confined to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump last year backed the progressive this year. However it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Impact

A major development of the night was the sky-high participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Turnout was much greater than anticipated. I thought it could go over two million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. 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 exceed 50% of the vote. Is he on course for that?

Currently you would say he’s likely to get over half. He has 50.4% but remain probably 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he does because afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really was unexpected. Cuomo kept very white areas, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained many conservatives on Staten Island who had a strong turnout. I think there was a lot of strategic balloting by the Republicans. This happened before the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome unless Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – was support for the candidate dominant in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think existed a little dilution of the progressive zone in some areas like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for Cuomo. So there existed a little resistance. But no, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the vote there was coverage on whether the candidate was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he did?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he performed strongly. But in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if existed major surprises here, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that key figures from progressives hail from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I think that every city in America could develop their own commie corridor. Cities are the epicenters of leftwing power in America – because youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.