🔗 Share this article

Only 48 hours prior to the New York mayoral election, Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – not just who would win overall, but block by block. Lange, an expert in elections who grew up in New York City, has spent over a decade in progressive politics and has become something of a well-known figure this year for his deep dives into city data and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise forecast map – which correctly forecast that the progressive candidate would win while missing Andrew Cuomo’s solid showing – on his Substack, his platform. Lange possesses a talent for clever terms. He pointed out, for instance, the divide between the progressive stronghold, stretching from one neighborhood to another area to a third locale, where he predicted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the “capitalist corridor” on Manhattan’s Upper East and Upper West Sides. In those areas, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in readership and the majority of electors favored the independent, who ran as a conservative-courting independent.

Voting Day Patterns and Unexpected Results

How was your election night?

It was necessary since they were adding around 200,000 votes into the system every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: The candidate led the early vote by 12 points, but came large groups of ballots that came in later and the advantage dropped from 12% to 8%. I was worried.

You know, there was a world in which yesterday went kind of poorly for him, in which Cuomo was going to end up essentially doubling his votes from the Democratic primary. However the winner gained 500,000 votes to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he won. He went out and massively expanded his base from the primary.

Expanding Support

How did the mayor-elect get additional support from?

He assembled the coalition that the left always wanted to build: diverse racially, youthful, it’s renters and it’s people facing cost pressures. He gained significantly with Black and Hispanic voters, everyday New Yorkers, relative to the earlier election. Additionally he further maximized his base of liberal progressives, youthful radicals, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

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

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

It’s definitely a real thing, confined to working-class Latinos, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Voters in ethnic enclaves that supported the former president previously went for the progressive now. However it’s not that he was winning over Caucasian laborers and Maga voters.

Voter Participation and Effects

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

Each candidate. Turnout was much greater than anticipated. I figured it could exceed 2 million, but it reached 2.3 million – that is a huge number of participants. There was a substantial anti-Mamdani block, who were motivated, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to win.

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

Currently you would say he’s favored to surpass half. He has just over 50% but remain probably 200,000 votes uncounted at that time. Thus I don’t think it’s definitive, but I believe it’s likely, and I wish he achieves it because then none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

Republican Collapse

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His vote plummeted.

He didn’t win any district in any area. Including one neighborhood in the borough, similar to an 88% Trump neighborhood. That really surprised me. Cuomo kept Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many Republicans on Staten Island with a strong turnout. I believe occurred a lot of tactical voting by GOP voters. They were doing it before Trump tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide if Mamdani’s coalition failed to expand.

Progressive Strongholds

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

In my view existed a little dilution of the progressive zone in certain places like neighborhoods that have more older white ethnic folks. There, for example, the property owners and homeowners supported the independent. So there was some opposition. But overall, largely 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

In the lead-up to the election we reported on if Mamdani was making inroads with Jewish New Yorkers. Is there any suggestion that he succeeded?

Exist neighborhoods with a lot of secular and more progressive-leaning Jews – like specific locales – where he did well. However in the affluent districts like the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential in those places. Similarly in the moderate communities including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they favored the independent. And also, you have Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the borough, they were strongly Cuomo. Therefore it’s unclear if existed crazy narrative-busters here, but Mamdani retained left-leaning areas and including sections of the Upper West Side with large leads.

Long-Term Significance

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

Absolutely, it’s no coincidence that key political leaders from the left come from a handful of neighborhoods in the boroughs. I’m sure that we’ll see more of that – people will emerge from these areas to be promoted to higher office.

However I believe that each urban center in America can have similar progressive hubs. Urban places are the epicenters of leftwing power in America – since youth reside there, people rent and they represent locales where individuals struggle by the inequalities we face.