🔗 Share this article

Only two days before the New York race for mayor, Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – going beyond the winner overall, and precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, devoted more than ten years in progressive politics and emerged as something of a well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into city data and polling.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate was victorious although missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his newsletter, his platform. He possesses a talent for clever terms. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to another area to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, certain media outlets and financial newspapers surpass the New York Times” in readership and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

I had to do that because they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the system frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but came two big batches of ballots added after that and the advantage dropped from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible 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 supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He built the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his core of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He created the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, tenants and residents squeezed by affordability

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

It’s definitely a real thing, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for Trump previously went for the progressive now. However it’s not that he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Impact

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

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I figured it could go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. There was a substantial opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to win.

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

Currently it appears he’s likely to surpass 50%. He has just over 50% but there’s still around 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think certain, but I believe probable, and I wish he does so afterwards none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His vote completely collapsed.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any area. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump area. That really surprised me. Cuomo kept very white areas, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained many Republicans on the island who had a high participation. I think occurred significant tactical voting by the Republicans. They were doing it prior to Trump endorsed for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

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

In my view there was a little dilution of the commie corridor 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 some opposition. But no, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote there was coverage on whether Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance definitely mattered in those places. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, there are newcomers from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, who were strongly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if there were major surprises here, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what the city means politically? Will the commie corridor become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest political leaders from the left hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – people will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

However I believe that every city in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of leftwing power in America – because youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities exist.