🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours before the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – going beyond the winner citywide, but block by block. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in the city, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as a kind of well-known figure this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, where he forecasted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would win by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the New York Times” in readership and most voters favored the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your night?

It was necessary because they were dropping approximately 200K votes into the tally every few minutes! I was actually a little nervous initially: Mamdani was ahead the early vote by 12 points, but there were two big batches of votes that came in later and the advantage went 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 Democratic primary. However Mamdani gained 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he succeeded. He campaigned and greatly broadened his support from the primary.

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, tenants and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the earlier election. Plus he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: multiracial, young, tenants and residents squeezed by affordability

There were also a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is that a big trend?

It is a real thing, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for the former president last year went for the progressive this year. But it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

One of the big stories of the night was the sky-high participation. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured it could go over 2 million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a huge number of participants. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was also motivated, and that sufficed to secure victory.

You predicted he’d get over half the ballots. Is he on course for that?

Currently you would say he’s likely to surpass half. He’s at 50.4% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think probable, and I wish he does so afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His support plummeted.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any borough. Including one neighborhood in the borough, similar to an 88% Trump neighborhood. That truly was unexpected. The independent kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added many Republicans on the island who had a strong turnout. I think occurred significant strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened before the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – was support for Mamdani dominant in those parts of the boroughs?

In my view there was some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and residents all went for the independent. So there existed a little resistance. However no, largely the leftist base is a key factor why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

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?

There are areas with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he performed strongly. But in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if existed crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he did hold left-leaning areas and even parts of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest figures from the left come from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that we’ll see more of that – people will come from these areas to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that every city in America can have similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in America – since they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.