🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the New York mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a significant electoral prediction – not just who would win citywide, and block by block. The analyst, a political analyst born and raised in New York 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 municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although missing the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, the Narrative War. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, as an example, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that Mamdani would win by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the mainstream paper” in audience and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

What was your election night?

It was necessary because they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the system frequently! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but came two big batches of votes added after that and the advantage went from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible where yesterday went somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which the opponent would have basically doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. However the winner gained half a million supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he won. He went out and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He assembled the alliance that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with minority communities, everyday New Yorkers, compared to the primary. Additionally he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He created the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, renters and people squeezed by affordability

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

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president last year backed the progressive this year. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Impact

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

Each candidate. Turnout was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured it could exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – which is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial opposition group, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

You forecasted he’d exceed 50% of the vote. Is he likely for that?

Right now you would say he’s favored to get over half. He’s at 50.4% but remain around 200K ballots left to report at that time. Thus it’s not it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it so then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His vote plummeted.

He lost any district in any area. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative neighborhood. That truly was unexpected. Cuomo kept very white areas, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added many Republicans on the island with a strong turnout. I believe there was a lot of strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened prior to Trump endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome unless Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

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

In my view existed a little dilution of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. In Astoria, instance, the property owners and homeowners supported Cuomo. So there was some opposition. But no, largely the leftist base is a key factor why Mamdani won – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on whether Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he did?

There are areas with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – such as specific locales – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel was influential there. Similarly in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. Plus, you have newcomers from the former Soviet Union in the borough, they were strongly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but he retained left-leaning areas and even parts of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what the city means politically? Will the commie corridor become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these areas to be elevated nationally.

But I think that every city in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.