🔗 Share this article

Only two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, Michael Lange made a significant forecast – not just who would win citywide, but block by block. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, devoted over a decade in progressive politics and has become a kind of well-known figure this year for his thorough analyses into city data and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. He has a flair for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from Park Slope to another area to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would win by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the mainstream paper” in audience and most voters favored the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

What was your election night?

It was necessary because they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the tally frequently! I felt somewhat anxious initially: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but there were large groups of votes added after that and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

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

Coalition Building

How did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He assembled the alliance that the left long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Plus he boosted his core of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse, young, 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, Asian communities 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 white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Effects

A major development of the night was the record participation. Who did that help?

Both sides. Turnout was significantly higher than I had expected. I figured we might go over 2 million, but it reached 2.3 million – which is a huge number of participants. Existed a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

You predicted he’d get over half the ballots. Is he on course for that?

Currently it appears he’s favored to surpass 50%. He’s at 50.4% but there’s still probably 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he does because then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

Republican Collapse

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, was another surprise. His support completely collapsed.

He didn’t win a single precinct in any area. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an 88% Trump area. That truly surprised me. The independent kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many conservatives on Staten Island with a strong turnout. I think there was significant strategic balloting by the Republicans. This happened before Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide if Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think existed some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the property owners and residents supported Cuomo. Thus there was some opposition. However no, mostly the leftist base is a key factor why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the election there was coverage on if Mamdani was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he did?

There are neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. But in the wealthy Jewish communities like the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance definitely mattered there. Likewise in the moderate communities like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were strongly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if existed major surprises on this one, but Mamdani did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

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

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that key political leaders from the left hail from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I’m sure that there will be more of that – candidates will emerge from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

But I think that each urban center in the US can have their own commie corridor. Cities are the centers of leftwing power in America – since youth reside there, people rent and they are places where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.