🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange made a bold forecast – not just the winner citywide, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, a political analyst who grew up in the city, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and has become something of a well-known figure recently for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although missing the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters favored Cuomo, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

I had to do that because they were adding approximately 200K votes into the tally every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of ballots that came in later and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, there was a world where yesterday turned out kind of poorly for him, in which Cuomo was going to end up basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. However Mamdani gained 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Coalition Building

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

He assembled the coalition that the left long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

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

There were also a number of supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president previously backed Zohran this year. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

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

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I thought we might exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed to win.

You forecasted he’d exceed half the ballots. Is he on course for that?

Right now you would say he’s likely to surpass half. He’s at 50.4% but remain probably 200,000 votes left to report at that time. Thus it’s not certain, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he does because afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any area. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump area. That really was unexpected. The independent kept Caucasian districts, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained all of these conservatives on Staten Island who had a high participation. I think there was a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

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

I think there was some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the property owners and residents all went for the independent. Thus there existed some opposition. But no, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Zohran prevailed – he scored between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the election we reported on if the candidate was making inroads with the community. Is there any suggestion that he did?

There are neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the affluent districts such as the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored Cuomo. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly supportive. So I don’t know if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

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

Yes, it’s no coincidence that key figures from progressives hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that there will be more of that – people will emerge from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

However I believe that each urban center in America could develop similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of leftwing power in the nation – since youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.