🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – going beyond the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as a kind of well-known figure recently for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the “commie corridor”, stretching from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would win by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in audience and most voters favored the independent, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your night?

It was necessary since they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the tally frequently! I was actually a little nervous initially: The candidate was ahead the early vote by 12 points, but there were large groups of ballots that came in after that and the advantage went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world where election day turned out kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which the opponent would have essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However Mamdani gained half a million votes to his initial base, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani gain additional support from?

He built the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Additionally he boosted his base of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the coalition that the left long aimed for: multiracial, youthful, renters and residents struggling with costs

Additionally, there were a number of supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for the former president previously went for the progressive now. However it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Turnout and Effects

One of the big stories of the election was the record turnout. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I figured we might go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – that is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

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

Right now it appears he’s likely to get over half. He has just over 50% but remain probably 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it so afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

The GOP candidate, the conservative contender, is the other big story. His support completely collapsed.

He lost any district in any borough. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really was unexpected. The independent kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained all of these conservatives on Staten Island who had a high participation. I believe there was significant strategic balloting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to Trump endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if the winning alliance failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was a little dilution of the commie corridor in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. Thus there existed some opposition. But overall, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Zohran won – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the vote there was coverage on whether Mamdani was gaining ground with the community. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. But in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Similarly in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were strongly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but he did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key figures from the left come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be more of that – people will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

However I think that every city in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.