🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold electoral prediction – not just the winner citywide, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, a political analyst born and raised in the city, has spent more than ten years in left-leaning activism and has become a kind of well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise forecast map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate would win while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his Substack, the Narrative War. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the split between the “commie corridor”, stretching from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he predicted (correctly) that Mamdani would win by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your night?

I had to do that since they were adding around 200,000 votes into the system every few minutes! I felt a little nervous initially: Mamdani led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came two big batches of votes added later and his lead went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world in which election day turned out kind of poorly for him, where Cuomo would have basically doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. However Mamdani added 500,000 supporters to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

Where did the mayor-elect get those extra votes from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, tenants and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Additionally he boosted his base of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He created the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: multiracial, youthful, renters and residents struggling with costs

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

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, confined to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Muslims. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported Trump last year went for the progressive this year. However it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

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

Both sides. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I thought it could go over two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – which is a huge number of participants. There was a substantial opposition group, energized, but his supporters was equally driven, and that was enough to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s likely to get over 50%. He has just over 50% but there’s still probably 200,000 votes left to report at that time. So I don’t think certain, but I believe probable, and I hope he does so afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His vote completely collapsed.

He lost any district in any area. Not even one neighborhood in the borough, similar to an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained all of these Republicans on the island with a high participation. I think there was significant tactical voting by the Republicans. This happened prior to the former president tweeted his support for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – was support for the candidate dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view there was some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there existed 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 making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his position on Israel definitely mattered there. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, you have Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in the borough, who were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters here, but he retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and even parts of the another locale with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what New York means politically? Will progressive base become a launch pad for leftwing candidates?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that key political leaders from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – candidates will emerge from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I think that every city in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in America – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they are places where people are crushed by the disparities exist.