🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, and block by block. Lange, a political analyst born and raised in the city, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as something of a well-known figure recently for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his highly detailed prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win although failed to predict the independent candidate’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. He possesses a talent for clever terms. He pointed out, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers surpass the New York Times” in audience and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Trends and Surprises

What was your night?

I had to do that since they were dropping approximately 200K ballots into the system frequently! I was actually a little nervous at the beginning: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of votes added after that and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

You know, there was a world in which election day turned out somewhat badly for Mamdani, in which the opponent would have basically increasing his support from the Democratic primary. But the winner added 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He built the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, tenants and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Plus he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and immigrant groups. Victory required without expanding his appeal.

He created the coalition that the left long aimed for: diverse, young, tenants and residents squeezed by affordability

There were also some Trump/Mamdani voters – is that a big trend?

It’s definitely a genuine phenomenon, confined to working-class Latinos, south Asians and Islamic voters. Electors in ethnic enclaves that supported Trump previously went for Zohran this year. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Effects

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

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than anticipated. I thought it could go over 2 million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. There was a decent opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that was enough to secure victory.

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

Right now you would say he’s likely to surpass 50%. He has 50.4% but there’s still probably 200K ballots uncounted at that time. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe it’s likely, and I hope he does because then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His support plummeted.

He lost any district in any borough. Not even one neighborhood in Staten Island, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really surprised me. The independent kept Caucasian districts, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added many Republicans on the island with a high participation. I believe occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened prior to the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide unless the winning alliance failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for Mamdani dominant in those areas of the boroughs?

In my view existed some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. There, instance, the property owners and homeowners all went for the independent. So there existed a little resistance. But overall, mostly the leftist base is a key factor why Zohran prevailed – he scored between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

Prior to the vote there was coverage on whether Mamdani was gaining ground with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are neighborhoods with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. But in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they all leaned Cuomo. Plus, you have newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were pretty staunchly supportive. So I don’t know if there were major surprises here, but Mamdani retained more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

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

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that some of the biggest figures from the left come from a few areas in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see additional examples – people will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

However I think that every city in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – since they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where people are crushed by the inequalities we face.