🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the NYC mayoral election, political analyst Michael Lange made a significant electoral prediction – not just who would win citywide, but block by block. The analyst, a political analyst who grew up in the city, devoted over a decade in left-leaning activism and has become a kind of local celebrity this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and polling.

He released his highly detailed prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win although missing the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He possesses a talent for clever terms. He pointed out, as an example, the split between the “commie corridor”, running from Park Slope to another area to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, certain media outlets and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in audience and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

How was your night?

I had to do that because they were adding approximately 200K votes into the system frequently! I felt somewhat anxious at the beginning: Mamdani was ahead the early vote by a dozen percentage points, but came large groups of ballots added later and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world where election day turned out kind of poorly for him, where Cuomo would have essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. But the winner gained 500,000 supporters to his primary coalition, and this was critical why he succeeded. He went out and greatly broadened his base from the first round.

Coalition Building

How did the mayor-elect gain additional support from?

He assembled the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, tenants and individuals squeezed by affordability. He gained considerably with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the primary. Plus he boosted his base of left-leaning activists, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. He couldn’t have won without making those significant inroads.

He created the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, tenants and people struggling with costs

There were also some Trump/Mamdani voters – is this significant?

It’s definitely a real thing, limited to Hispanic laborers, south Asians and Muslims. Voters in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president last year backed the progressive this year. But I wouldn’t say he was gaining white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Turnout and Impact

One of the big stories of the election was the record turnout. Who benefited?

Both sides. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured we might exceed two million, but it reached 2.3M – which is a huge number of participants. There was a substantial opposition group, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was also motivated, and that sufficed to secure victory.

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

Right now it appears he’s favored to get over half. He has just over 50% but there’s still around 200,000 votes left to report as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think it’s definitive, but I think it’s likely, and I hope he achieves it so then no one can say Sliwa was a disruptor.

GOP Decline

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

He didn’t win a single precinct in any area. Not even Tottenville in the borough, similar to an 88% Trump neighborhood. That truly surprised me. The independent held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained all of these Republicans on the island who had a high participation. I believe there was significant strategic balloting by GOP voters. This happened prior to Trump endorsed for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

Regarding your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for the candidate overwhelming in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view existed some weakening of the commie corridor in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. There, instance, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported Cuomo. Thus there existed some opposition. But no, mostly the leftist base is another huge reason why Mamdani won – he was polling between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Community Support

Prior to the election we reported on if Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Any indication that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts such as the Manhattan area, his position on Israel definitely mattered in those places. Likewise in the more middle-class Jewish areas like Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they all leaned the independent. And also, there are Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, who were pretty staunchly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if existed major surprises on this one, but Mamdani did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the another locale with large leads.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what New York means politically? Will commie corridor serve as a springboard for leftwing candidates?

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key political leaders from progressives come from a few areas in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that we’ll see more of that – people will come from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

However I think that each urban center in the US could develop their own commie corridor. Cities are the centers of progressive influence in America – since they’re young, tenancy is common and they represent locales where people are crushed by the inequalities exist.