🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange issued a bold electoral prediction – not just the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, devoted over a decade in progressive politics and has become a kind of local celebrity recently for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious while missing the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, his platform. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in readership and the majority of electors leaned toward Cuomo, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

How was your election night?

I had to do that because they were dropping approximately 200K votes into the system frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: The candidate led the early vote by 12 points, but came two big batches of ballots added after that and the advantage went from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, it was possible where yesterday went kind of poorly for Mamdani, where the opponent would have basically increasing his support from the earlier contest. However Mamdani added 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He went out and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain additional support from?

He assembled the coalition that the left long aimed for: diverse racially, youthful, tenants and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he boosted his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: diverse, young, tenants and residents squeezed by affordability

There were also some Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It’s definitely a real thing, confined to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump last year backed Zohran now. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Impact

A major development of the election was the record turnout. Who did that help?

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I thought we might go over two million, but it reached 2.3 million – which is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Right now it appears he’s likely to surpass 50%. He’s at just over 50% but remain around 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I think probable, and I hope he does because afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

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

He didn’t win any district in any borough. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really surprised me. The independent kept Caucasian districts, affluent zones and devout communities, and then added many Republicans on Staten Island who had a high participation. I believe occurred significant tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome unless the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those areas of the boroughs?

I think existed a little dilution of the commie corridor in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. Thus there was a little resistance. But no, largely the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote there was coverage on whether the candidate was gaining ground 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 performed strongly. But in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance definitely mattered there. Similarly in the moderate communities including Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. So I don’t know if existed major surprises on this one, but he retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what New York represents in politics? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from progressives come from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will come from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

However I think that every city in America can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the disparities we face.