🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours prior to the New York mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant forecast – going beyond the winner citywide, and precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and has become something of a local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani would win although missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, as an example, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to Bushwick to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in audience and most voters leaned toward Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

It was necessary because they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the system frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: The candidate led the initial ballots by 12 points, but there were two big batches of votes that came in after that and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, it was possible where yesterday turned out somewhat badly for him, where Cuomo was going to end up basically doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However Mamdani gained half a million votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

How did the mayor-elect get 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 minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his base of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He created the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, renters and people struggling with costs

There were also some supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It is a genuine phenomenon, confined to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump last year backed the progressive now. But I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

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

Both sides. Turnout was much greater than I had expected. I thought we might go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. There was a substantial opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that was enough to win.

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

Right now you would say he’s favored to surpass 50%. He has just over 50% but there’s still around 200K ballots uncounted at that time. So it’s not certain, but I believe probable, and I wish he does because then no one can say the Republican was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

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

He lost any district in any borough. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an 88% Trump area. That really surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained all of these Republicans on Staten Island who had a high participation. I believe occurred significant tactical voting by the Republicans. They were doing it prior to the former president endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome unless the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed “commie corridor” – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view there was some weakening of the commie corridor in some areas like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, instance, the Greek landlords and residents supported Cuomo. Thus there was some opposition. However no, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the election there was coverage on if the candidate was gaining ground with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential in those places. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored Cuomo. And also, you have newcomers from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – people will come from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

However I think that every city in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of leftwing power in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.