🔗 Share this article

Just two days prior to the New York race for mayor, Michael Lange made a significant forecast – not just who would win citywide, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, devoted more than ten years in progressive politics and has become something of a well-known figure this year for his deep dives into municipal statistics and polling.

He released his highly detailed forecast map – accurately predicting that Zohran Mamdani would win while failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his Substack, the Narrative War. He has a flair for clever terms. He highlighted, as an example, the divide between the progressive stronghold, running from one neighborhood to Bushwick to Astoria, where he forecasted (correctly) that the left-wing candidate would win by huge margins, and the conservative-leaning zone on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. There, “the Free Press and financial newspapers outrank the New York Times” in readership and the majority of electors leaned toward the independent, campaigning as a conservative-courting independent.

Election Night Patterns and Surprises

How was your night?

I had to do that because they were adding around 200,000 votes into the system frequently! I felt a little nervous at the beginning: Mamdani led the initial ballots by 12 points, but came large groups of votes that came in after that and the advantage dropped from 12 to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, there was a world in which yesterday went kind of poorly for him, where the opponent would have essentially doubling his votes from the earlier contest. However the winner gained half a million supporters to his initial base, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and greatly broadened his support from the primary.

Expanding Support

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

He assembled the alliance that the left long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He improved significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, working- and middle-class voters, relative to the earlier election. Plus he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and immigrant groups. Victory required without making those significant inroads.

He created the coalition that progressives always wanted to build: multiracial, young, renters and residents squeezed by affordability

There were also some supporters of both candidates – is that a big trend?

It is a genuine phenomenon, limited to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Muslims. Voters in immigrant strongholds that supported Trump last year went for Zohran now. But I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

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

Each candidate. Participation was much greater than anticipated. I figured we might exceed two million, but it reached 2.3 million – that 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 forecasted he’d exceed half the ballots. Is he likely for that?

Right now it appears he’s favored to surpass 50%. He has just over 50% but remain probably 200,000 votes uncounted as of Wednesday morning. Thus I don’t think it’s definitive, but I believe probable, and I wish he achieves it so afterwards no one can say Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

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

He lost a single precinct in any area. Including one neighborhood in Staten Island, which is like an 88% Trump area. That truly was unexpected. Cuomo held very white areas, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and then added many conservatives on Staten Island who had a high participation. I believe occurred significant strategic balloting by the Republicans. They were doing it before Trump tweeted his support for Cuomo, but that definitely helped. It could have even turned the tide unless the winning alliance hadn’t grown.

Progressive Strongholds

Regarding your much mentioned left-wing base – was support for Mamdani dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

I think existed some weakening of the progressive zone in certain places like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. There, for example, the property owners and residents supported the independent. So there was some opposition. But no, mostly the commie corridor is a key factor why Mamdani prevailed – he was polling between high percentages in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the vote we reported on whether the candidate was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he did?

There are areas with many secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts like the Manhattan area, his position on Israel was influential in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Spuyten Duyvil and Riverdale – they favored Cuomo. And also, there are newcomers from Eastern Europe in southern Brooklyn, who were strongly Cuomo. So I don’t know if existed major surprises here, but Mamdani retained left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Long-Term Significance

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

Absolutely, it’s not accidental that key political leaders from progressives come from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I’m sure that there will be additional examples – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

But I believe that each urban center in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the centers of progressive influence in the nation – since youth reside there, people rent and they are places where individuals struggle by the disparities exist.