🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant forecast – going beyond who would win overall, but block by block. The analyst, a political analyst born and raised in New York City, has spent over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win although failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. He has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to Bushwick to Astoria, where he predicted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and financial newspapers surpass the New York Times” in audience and most voters leaned toward Cuomo, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your night?

I had to do that because they were dropping around 200,000 ballots into the system frequently! I was actually a little nervous at the beginning: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of ballots added after that and his lead dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world where election day went somewhat badly for him, in which the opponent was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. However the winner gained half a million votes to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He went out and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he boosted his core of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: multiracial, young, renters and residents struggling with costs

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

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in immigrant strongholds that went for Trump last year went for the progressive now. However it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

A major development of the election was the sky-high participation. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Turnout was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured we might go over 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – which is a huge number of participants. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s favored to get over half. He’s at 50.4% but remain probably 200K ballots uncounted at that time. So I don’t think certain, but I believe it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it because afterwards no one can say the Republican was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His support plummeted.

He lost any district in any borough. Including Tottenville in Staten Island, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really was unexpected. The independent held very white areas, affluent zones and devout communities, and plus gained many conservatives on the island with a high participation. I believe there was significant tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to the former president endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those areas 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, for example, the Greek landlords and residents all went for the independent. So there was some opposition. But no, mostly the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on if the candidate was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, who were strongly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he did hold 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 the commie corridor serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from the left hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that every city in the US can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in America – because they’re young, people rent and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities exist.