🔗 Share this article

Just two days before the NYC race for mayor, Michael Lange made a bold electoral prediction – going beyond who would win overall, but block by block. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in the city, has spent over a decade in left-leaning activism and has become something of a local celebrity this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He released his extremely precise prediction map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win while failed to predict the independent candidate’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for witty coinages. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (accurately) that Mamdani would win by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the New York Times” in audience and most voters leaned toward Cuomo, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Patterns and Unexpected Results

How was your night?

It was necessary because they were dropping around 200,000 ballots into the system frequently! I was actually 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%. It was concerning.

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

Coalition Building

Where did Mamdani get those extra votes from?

He assembled the coalition that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people squeezed by affordability. He improved significantly with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his core of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He built the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, 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 Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that went for the former president last year went for the progressive this year. However I wouldn’t say he was gaining Caucasian laborers and Trump loyalists.

Voter Participation and Impact

One of the big stories of the night was the sky-high participation. Who did that help?

Both sides. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I thought it could exceed 2 million, but it reached 2.3 million – which is a huge number of participants. There was a decent anti-Mamdani block, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

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

Currently it appears he’s likely to get over 50%. He has just over 50% but there’s still around 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. So it’s not it’s definitive, but I believe probable, and I hope he does because then none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

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

He lost a single precinct in any borough. Including one neighborhood in the borough, which is like an highly conservative area. That truly surprised me. Cuomo held very white areas, affluent zones and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added many Republicans on the island with a high participation. I think occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it prior to the former president endorsed for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It might have changed the outcome unless Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

What about your often-discussed left-wing base – was support for the candidate overwhelming in those areas of the boroughs?

In my view there was some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like Astoria or Greenpoint that have older Caucasian residents. There, instance, the property owners and homeowners all went for Cuomo. Thus there existed some opposition. However overall, largely the leftist base is another huge reason why Zohran won – he was polling between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the election we reported on if the candidate was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he did?

There are neighborhoods with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – such as Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he did well. However in the wealthy Jewish communities such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential in those places. Likewise in the moderate communities like Queens neighborhoods, or Bronx areas – they favored Cuomo. Plus, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, who were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore I don’t know if existed major surprises on this one, but Mamdani did hold left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

Has Mamdani rewritten what New York represents in politics? Will commie corridor become a launch pad for progressive contenders?

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from the left come from a handful of neighborhoods in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. I believe that we’ll see additional examples – people will emerge from these neighborhoods to be elevated nationally.

However I believe that each urban center in the US could develop similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in the nation – because they’re young, people rent and they are places where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.