🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the NYC race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant forecast – not just the winner citywide, and block by block. Lange, an expert in elections born and raised in the city, has spent over a decade in left-leaning activism and emerged as a kind of well-known figure this year for his deep dives into city data and polling.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani was victorious although missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. He possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the split between the “commie corridor”, running from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the mainstream paper” in readership and the majority of electors favored the independent, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Voting Day Patterns and Surprises

How was your election night?

I had to do that since they were dropping around 200,000 votes into the tally every few minutes! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: The candidate led the initial ballots by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of ballots that came in later and his lead went from 12 to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world in which election day went kind of poorly for him, where the opponent would have essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. But the winner added half a million votes to his initial base, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and massively expanded his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

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

He built the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the primary. Additionally he boosted his core of liberal progressives, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

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

There were also a number of supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It is a real thing, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Muslims. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for the former president last year went for the progressive now. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

A major development of the election was the record turnout. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I figured we might exceed 2 million, but it reached 2.3M – that is a lot of darn voters. Existed a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that was enough to secure victory.

You forecasted he’d exceed 50% of the vote. Is he likely for that?

Currently you would say he’s likely to get over half. He’s at just over 50% but there’s still probably 200K ballots left to report as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I believe probable, and I hope he achieves it because afterwards no one can say the Republican was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any area. Including one neighborhood in the borough, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That truly surprised me. The independent kept very white areas, affluent zones and devout communities, and then added all of these Republicans on Staten Island with a strong turnout. I think there was significant tactical voting by the Republicans. They were doing it prior to Trump endorsed for the candidate, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome unless the winning alliance failed to expand.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your often-discussed “commie corridor” – was support for Mamdani overwhelming in those areas of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think there was some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. There, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported the independent. Thus there was a little resistance. However overall, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Zohran won – he scored between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the election there was coverage on if Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he did?

Exist areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential there. Similarly in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. Plus, you have newcomers from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, who were strongly supportive. 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 New York means politically? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest political leaders from the left hail from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – candidates will emerge from these areas to be elevated nationally.

But I believe that every city in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Urban places are the centers of leftwing power in the nation – since youth reside there, tenancy is common and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.