🔗 Share this article

Only two days before the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – not just who would win overall, 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 emerged as a kind of local celebrity recently for his thorough analyses into city data and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate was victorious although failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his newsletter, the Narrative War. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, as an example, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (accurately) that Mamdani would triumph by huge margins, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Trends and Unexpected Results

What was your election night?

I had to do that since they were dropping approximately 200K votes into the tally every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious initially: The candidate was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came two big batches of ballots that came in later and his lead dropped from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

Understand, there was a world in which election day turned out kind of poorly for Mamdani, in which Cuomo would have basically doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However the winner added 500,000 supporters to his initial base, and this was critical why he succeeded. He campaigned and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

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

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: it’s multiracial, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He improved considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Additionally he boosted his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He built the alliance that progressives always wanted to build: multiracial, young, tenants and residents struggling with costs

Additionally, there were a number of Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It is a real thing, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported Trump previously went for the progressive now. However it’s not that he was gaining white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Effects

One of the big stories of the election was the sky-high turnout. Who benefited?

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than I had expected. I figured we might go over two million, but it’s closer to 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial opposition group, energized, but his supporters was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

You forecasted he’d get over 50% of the vote. Is he on course for that?

Currently you would say he’s likely to surpass half. He has just over 50% but remain around 200,000 votes left to report at that time. So I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it so afterwards none can claim the Republican was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

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

He lost any district in any area. Not even Tottenville in the borough, which is like an highly conservative area. That really was unexpected. The independent kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and devout communities, and then added all of these conservatives on the island who had a high participation. I think occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened prior to Trump endorsed for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if the winning alliance failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – did backing for the candidate overwhelming in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was some weakening of the progressive zone in some areas like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners all went for the independent. Thus there was a little resistance. However overall, largely the leftist base is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he scored between high percentages in specific neighborhoods.

Community Support

In the lead-up to the election we reported on if the candidate was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. But in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his Middle East stance was influential in those places. Likewise in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored the independent. And also, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, they were strongly Cuomo. Therefore I don’t know if existed major surprises here, but Mamdani did hold more progressive Jewish neighborhoods and including sections of the another locale by big margins.

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 no coincidence that key figures from the left hail from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – people will emerge from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that each urban center in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in America – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they are places where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.