🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant forecast – not just the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in the city, devoted more than ten years in left-leaning activism and has become something of a well-known figure this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed forecast map – which correctly forecast that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to Astoria, where he predicted (accurately) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal outrank the New York Times” in audience and most voters favored Cuomo, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

What was your election night?

I had to do that since they were adding approximately 200K votes into the tally every few minutes! I felt a little nervous at the beginning: Mamdani led the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but there were two big batches of ballots that came in later and the advantage went from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world where election day turned out somewhat badly for him, in which Cuomo would have essentially increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But the winner added half a million supporters to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani gain those extra votes from?

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He created the alliance that the left long aimed for: diverse, youthful, tenants and people struggling with costs

Additionally, there were a number of supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Voters in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president previously backed Zohran now. But it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

A major development of the election was the record turnout. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Turnout was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured it could exceed two million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – which is a huge number of participants. There was a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but his supporters was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

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

Right now you would say he’s likely to get over 50%. He has 50.4% but remain around 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. Thus I don’t think certain, but I think probable, and I wish he achieves it so then no one can say the Republican was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

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

He lost a single precinct in any area. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That truly surprised me. The independent held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added many conservatives on the island with a high participation. I believe there was a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to Trump endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome unless Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

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

In my view there was a little dilution of the commie corridor in some areas like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. In Astoria, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for Cuomo. So there existed some opposition. However overall, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the vote we reported on whether the candidate was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential there. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. And also, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly Cuomo. So it’s unclear if there were crazy narrative-busters on this one, but he retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale by big margins.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what the city means politically? Will progressive base become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest political leaders from progressives hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

However I believe that every city in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the centers of leftwing power in America – because they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.