🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the New York race for mayor, Michael Lange issued a bold electoral prediction – going beyond the winner overall, but block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, has spent more than ten years in progressive politics and has become a kind of local celebrity recently for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his highly detailed prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win although missing Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. He has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to another area to a third locale, where he forecasted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would win by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, certain media outlets and financial newspapers surpass the New York Times” in readership and most voters favored Cuomo, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

What was your election night?

It was necessary since they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the tally every few minutes! I was actually a little nervous initially: The candidate was ahead the initial ballots 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, there was a world where election day went kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which the opponent was going to end up essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However Mamdani added 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did the mayor-elect get additional support from?

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, tenants and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Plus he boosted his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

There were also a number of supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a real thing, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Muslims. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported Trump last year went for the progressive this year. However it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

One of the big stories of the night was the sky-high participation. Who did that help?

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than I had expected. I thought it could exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to get over half. He’s at just over 50% but remain probably 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it so afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, was another surprise. His vote plummeted.

He didn’t win any district in any area. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an highly conservative area. That really surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and plus gained all of these Republicans on Staten Island who had a strong turnout. I believe occurred significant tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened before Trump endorsed for the candidate, but it assisted. It might have changed the outcome if the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – was support for Mamdani dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was some weakening of the progressive zone in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the property owners and homeowners supported the independent. Thus there was some opposition. However overall, largely the commie corridor is another huge reason why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

In the lead-up to the election there was coverage on whether Mamdani was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts 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 Bronx areas – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, there are Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if existed major surprises here, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what New York means politically? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that key political leaders from progressives hail from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will emerge from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that each urban center in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in America – since youth reside there, people rent and they are places where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.