🔗 Share this article

Just 48 hours before the New York mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a significant forecast – going beyond who would win overall, and precinct by precinct. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a well-known figure this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and polling.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his newsletter, his platform. Lange has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, as an example, the split between the “commie corridor”, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would win by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

I had to do that because they were adding approximately 200K votes into the system every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were large groups of ballots added after that and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, it was possible in which yesterday turned out kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which the opponent would have essentially increasing his support from the Democratic primary. However the winner added half a million votes to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He campaigned and massively expanded his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse, young, tenants and people struggling with costs

There were also a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It is a real thing, confined to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Islamic voters. Voters in ethnic enclaves that went for the former president last year backed Zohran this year. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Impact

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

Each candidate. Participation was significantly higher than I had expected. I thought it could go over 2 million, but it reached 2.3 million – which is a lot of darn voters. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Currently it appears he’s likely to surpass 50%. He has just over 50% but there’s still around 200,000 votes uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he does because afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the conservative contender, is the other big story. His support plummeted.

He lost a single precinct in any area. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many Republicans on the island with a strong turnout. I think occurred significant strategic balloting by GOP voters. They were doing it before Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those parts of the boroughs?

I think there was some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the Greek landlords and residents all went for the independent. Thus there was some opposition. But no, largely the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani won – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the vote we reported on if the candidate was gaining ground with the community. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

There are neighborhoods with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential there. Similarly in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if there were major surprises on this one, but Mamdani did hold left-leaning areas and even parts of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

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

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest figures from progressives hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – candidates will emerge from these areas to be elevated nationally.

However I believe that every city in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the centers of leftwing power in America – since they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities exist.