Compelling evidence that wealthy New Yorkers are headed to the suburbs after election of a new mayor?

One article claims there is more evidence wealthy residents of New York City will move to the suburbs with the election of Zohran Mamdani:

Photo by Alena Darmel on Pexels.com

That urgency is showing up in the data. Pending home sales in Westchester are up roughly 15% from a year ago, while average showing activity has climbed more than 25% since midsummer, according to Compass agents Zach and Heather Harrison. “Concerns about higher taxes, safety, and a desire for more space are driving people to act quickly,” said Zach Harrison. “We’re seeing bidding wars well into the multimillion-dollar range.”

The rush has been so widespread that local agents have coined a term for it—the “Mamdani effect.” High-net-worth buyers from Manhattan and Brooklyn are placing offers sight unseen, often hundreds of thousands of dollars above asking, in a bid to outpace rivals. “It feels like the pandemic all over again, but with more urgency,” Heather Harrison said.

That sense of déjà vu is supported by market metrics. Nationwide, inventory has been growing for nearly two years, yet supply in affluent New York suburbs remains scarce. Realtor.com’s October Housing Report shows a 15.3% annual rise in active listings nationally, but that growth is tapering, with homes spending an average of 63 days on the market—five more than a year ago. In contrast, suburban markets ringing New York City are accelerating, defying the national slowdown…

Luxury enclaves like Greenwich, Conn., are seeing similar dynamics. Mark Pruner of Compass said inventory there is down more than 80% from 2019, leaving just 2.7 months of supply overall. “Contracts have surged in the past five weeks,” Pruner said, noting several listings that sold within days, including a $2.4 million home that fetched $2.96 million. “This is the strongest top-end market we’ve seen in years.”

I still have multiple questions, even with more evidence in this story than a previous one I wrote about:

  1. Would this come with a corresponding number of sales in New York City or will the new suburban purchases become the primary residence and the city properties can remain as investments?
  2. Who exactly are these people engaging in this real estate activity? Is it the over 100 billionaires who live in New York City? Is it the upper middle class? Are they people in particular industries or households or kids?
  3. What alternative factors could explain this increase in suburban real estate activity? The recent rise in the stock market?
  4. While there are consequences of people moving out of cities to the suburbs, the suggestion in the article is that they are staying in the region. How important is this in the long run – suburban residents still connected to city organizations and activity – compared to residents leaving the region all together?
  5. With political sorting and polarization in recent decades, there are regularly suggestions that people will make significant moves to be in places that are more amendable to their own political views. Is this particular example simply something we should now expect if cities or regions change politically?

White House construction turning building into a McMansion?

One political commentator recently argued the changes President Trump is making to the White House are turning the home into a McMansion:

Photo by Aaron Kittredge on Pexels.com

Discussing the makeshift tents for large events used by previous administrations, which the Trump administration has cited as proof a larger event space was needed, Lemon said, “The tents don’t bother me. I don’t think everything has to be a McMansion. He’s turning the white House into a McMansion.”

Applying the term McMansion is a critique. Rather than being a stately, public structure, the suggestion is that the White House is becoming too large, architecturally garish, a building to be mocked rather than admired. The new addition will detract from the coherence of the existing building. (The White House is already large with around 55,000 square feet in the central structure.)

Two related thoughts:

  1. President Trump is often associated with tall buildings and a particular interior design style. Neither necessarily go with the Neoclassical design of the outside. What will the new ballroom look like outside and inside compared to the rest of the architecture?
  2. I would imagine politicians in general would not like their homes to be called McMansions. Even if some live in large homes, to call those houses McMansions says something about their tastes. I have not seen anyone look systematically at the architecture of the homes of major politicians but considering how many might qualify as McMansions would be interesting.

    Political prediction markets vs. political polls

    Could political polls be replaced by political betting markets?

    Photo by Nataliya Vaitkevich on Pexels.com

    The rise of political betting is not just lucrative for the bettors and the platforms. Its advocates also hope that one day, it can replace the political prediction industry generally and remake the larger political media ecosystem. “[Traders are] incentivized with cold, hard cash to separate the emotion, to make a bet with their head rather than the heart,” said John A. Phillips, the CEO of the betting platform PredictIt. That means, the boosters argue, that they are more accurate than traditional polls and analyses of those polls…

    But another group is paying attention to these platforms’ rise: those who have a special interest in political predictions, from campaigns to journalists to any number of groups and individuals who might be affected by the outcome of an election. Rather than relying solely on polling, punditry or counting yard signs, in advance of big election nights, the markets put together all available information and spit out a number that looks like the collective wisdom of a lot of people with money on the line. That can often lead to a number that is a more comprehensive reflection of a certain candidate’s chances of winning than any single poll or piece of political analysis…

    While these markets’ long-term prediction capabilities can often equal or beat the predictions of most conventional polls, where they really have an edge is in rapidly responding to events…

    But 2024 is just a single data point. In 2016, for example, prediction markets underrated Trump’s chances compared to the 538 model. With few major U.S. elections that have a lot of betting volume to study, the truth is that it’s still not possible to know for certain whether prediction markets can consistently outperform polling averages.

    I wonder how much of this optimism about political betting is more about the perceived and real downsides of polling as of 2025. It has not preformed well in the last decade or so. Response rates are not good. There are lots of polls and polling companies claiming they can get a good poll. At what point does polling become so inadequate that media and others stop sponsoring polls and/or using the information? Or I could imagine a point in the next few years where a number of polls stop operating as several organizations show they get more accurate results.

    It would also be interesting to know how much money there is to be made in prediction markets versus what is invested in the polling industry. Who wins when lots of actors are involved in either polls or predictions? Or when do regular Americans participate in political prediction markets?

    And let’s see how academic studies of polls and prediction markets help shape the upcoming narratives about each. How much will careful studies help identify the strengths and weaknesses of each approach or are there are forces at work that will shape how people view these options?

    The mostly Christian US House and Senate

    How does the religious affiliation of the members of Congress compare to the religious affiliation of Americans as a whole? This came up recently in a conversation about religiosity and government so I tracked down some data.

    Photo by Kendall Hoopes on Pexels.com

    For the religious affiliation of Americans as a whole, here are figures from the Pew Religious Landscape Survey with data collected in 2023-24 from more than 35,000 respondents. With 62% of American adults identifying as Christian, here are the percentages for particular religious traditions:

    -23% evangelical Protestant

    -11% mainline Protestant

    -5% Black Protestant

    -19% Catholic

    -2% Latter-day Saint

    -2% Jewish

    -1% Orthodox Christian

    -1% Muslim

    -1% Buddhist

    -1% Hindu

    -29% religiously unaffiliated

    For the religious affiliations of members of Congress, here is a summary of what Wikipedia has for House members and Senate members. The categories are not the same as the religious traditions for the Pew Religious Landscape Survey but there are points to compare. Starting with members of the House of Representatives:

    -375 of the 435 (86%) are Christian. Of these Christians, 236 are Protestants in specified traditions (including 63 Baptists, 22 Methodists, 16 Episcopalians, 15 Presbyterians, 13 Lutherans, 10 non-denominationals) and 88 are unspecified Protestants. Of the 375 Christians, 126 are Catholics, 7 are Eastern Orthodox, and 6 are Latter-day Saints.

    -24 of the 435 (6%) are Jewish.

    -4 of the 435 (1%) are Muslim

    -4 of the 435 (1%) are Hindus

    -2 of the 435 (0.5%) are Buddhist

    -18 (4%) are unknown or refused to state.

    -4 (1%) are unaffiliated.

    And here is the religious affiliation for members of the Senate:

    -86 of the 100 (86%) are Christian. Of these Christians, 59 are Protestants in specified traditions (including 12 Baptists, 5 Methodists, 5 Episcopalians, 12 Presbyterians, 6 Lutherans, 6 non-denominationals) and 5 are unspecified Protestants. Of the 86 Christians, 24 are Catholics, 7 are Eastern Orthodox, and 3 are Latter-day Saints.

    -9 of the 100 (9%) are Jewish.

    -1 of the 100 (1%) are Buddhist

    -4 (4%) are unknown or refused to state.

    How does the religiosity of Congress compare to the country as a whole? Pew sums up:

    Christians will make up 87% of voting members in the Senate and House of Representatives, combined, in the 2025-27 congressional session. That’s down from 88% in the last session and 92% a decade ago...

    And yet, at 87%, Christians still make up the lion’s share of the Congress, far exceeding the Christian share of all U.S. adults, which stands at 62% after several decades of decline…

    The new Congress is also more religious than the general population by another, related measure: Nearly three-in-ten Americans (28%) are religiously unaffiliated, meaning they are atheist or agnostic or say their religion is “nothing in particular.” But less than 1% of Congress falls into this category…

    In a country where a majority of adults identify as Christian, Congress is roughly 25% more Christian than the population as a whole. This may change in the coming years as more American adults do not identify with any religious tradition or group.

    No Kings protests throughout the Chicago suburbs

    In the last decade or so, protests in the United States do not just take place in big cities. For example, the No Kings website listed over 30 gatherings in the suburbs of Chicago:

    The website listed 7 sites in Chicago itself, including the primary site in the Loop which drew over 100,000 people. But people in the region had plenty of options where they could join others. Some of these locations are close to the city while others are on the edges of the metropolitan region. From what I can see on the map, most residents were with 10-15 miles of a protest site and many could access multiple options.

    Three related thoughts:

    1. The portrayals of suburbia in the postwar era tended to emphasize its conservative or Republican bent. This may have been true in numerous places but is harder to sustain these days with suburbs closer to cities often leaning Democratic and suburbs on the suburban edges often leaning Republican.
    2. It would be interesting to look more closely at these suburban protest sites. Where can people gather in the suburbs for political purposes? Suburban downtowns or city halls? Shopping areas or busy streets? Public parks and public spaces? Which places helped increase the solidarity among those gathered and which ones helped them reach others who did not come?
    3. The suburbs are built around driving. How many protesters around the Chicago region drove, parked, and then protested? Protests tend to happen on foot but people have to be able to get there and options are limited in some suburban settings.

    If New York City elects a progressive mayor, how many wealthy residents will flee for Westchester County?

    With a mayoral election coming up in New York City, some residents are considering moving elsewhere:

    Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

    As the reality settles in that Zohran Mamdani — a steadfast Democratic Socialist — may soon become New York City‘s mayor, many city-dwellers are planning their escape route.

    This is because the policies at the core of Mamdani’s campaign are largely unpopular with wealthy and upper-middle class New Yorkers…

    ‘We are absolutely seeing a correlation between Zohran Mamdani’s surprise win in the Democratic primary and an uptick in real estate interest in Westchester,’ Zach and Heather Harrison, real estate agents in the area, noted.

    ‘Since the summer, nearly every buyer from the city we have taken out to see homes in Westchester has mentioned the mayoral election as one of the drivers for shopping in the suburbs,’ they told Realtor.com.

    Since Mamdani won the Democratic primary in June, sales going into contract in Westchester County are up 15 percent compared to the same period last year, according to The Harrison Team…

    In comparison to New York City, Westchester offers more space, lower crime rates, and often lower effective taxes.

    Several quick thoughts:

    1. The article is vague on numbers. How many people have moved or might move? And separate from how many do move, how many would have to move for it to be meaningful as a media story or make a substantial difference in local activity?
    2. We hear similar claims about political changes or taxes at the state or national level; people with resources will leave if they think they are being targeted and/or conditions are better elsewhere. I do not know if I have heard this before suggesting people will move from the city to that city’s suburbs.
    3. Westchester County could be a paradigmatic suburban county in the United States. It borders New York City and it grew quickly in the early 1900s. It became a wealthy suburban setting with many houses, access to the city via highway and railroad, some green spaces and waterways, and home to major corporations. Would an influx of wealthy New York City residents feed into the character of the county or alter it at all?
    4. At what point would policies or conditions need to change for most of wealthy residents of a city to leave?

    Criticizing cities and ICE activity in complex suburbia

    President Donald Trump often criticizes American big cities, particularly Chicago as he has mentioned the city multiple times in his first and second term. Just yesterday in the Arizona service for Charlie Kirk, Trump highlighted Chicago:

    Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

    Trump told mourners that one of the last things the slain conservative activist and Illinois native said to him was, “Please, sir. Save Chicago.” Trump then launched into a familiar refrain, saying, “We’re going to save Chicago from horrible crime.”

    One of the Trump administration’s actions regarding Chicago includes recent ICE activity. While all the details are hard to come by, it appears however that this activity has not just affected people living in Chicago; there has been ICE activity in numerous suburbs. An ICE facility in Broadview. ICE agents approaching people in numerous suburbs, as far as 40 miles out from the city.

    These actions hint at the complexity of the Chicago region and suburbs across the United States. Even as some Americans have long associated cities with racial and ethnic diversity, this diversity has increased in suburbs in recent decades. The American suburbs are full of people of different racial and ethnic groups as well as large numbers of recent immigrants to the United States.

    So when Trump says Chicago has problems, does he mean just the city or is the whole region in question?Again, from the Kirk service:

    Trump later took aim at Gov. JB Pritzker, declaring, “You have an incompetent governor who thinks it’s OK when 11 people get murdered over the weekend. … He says he’s got crime [under control]. No, they don’t have it under control, but we’ll have it under control very quickly.”

    Both the city of Chicago and its suburbs have the same governor. Only one of the Chicago collar counties in Illinois voted for Trump in 2024: McHenry County. (There are portions of the greater Chicago area in southeastern Wisconsin and northwestern Indiana but they may not be part of the same conversation.) Are the problems some see in Chicago also ones they see present in suburbs?

    Costco, American consumption, and relationships with adversarial nations

    The Trump administration may limit the ability of Iranian officials to visit Costco and Sam’s Club when they visit the United Nations in New York City:

    Photo by Teju on Pexels.com

    The movements of Iranian diplomats are severely limited in New York, but one proposal being floated would bar them from shopping at big, members-only wholesale stores like Costco and Sam’s Club without first receiving the express permission of the State Department.

    Such stores have been a favorite of Iranian diplomats posted to and visiting New York because they are able to buy large quantities of products not available in their economically isolated country for relatively cheap prices and send them home.

    It was not immediately clear if or when the proposed shopping ban for Iran would take effect, but the memo said the State Department also was looking at drafting rules that would allow it to impose terms and conditions on memberships in wholesale clubs by all foreign diplomats in the U.S.

    Americans may be used to Costco and big box stores but they are not necessarily available all over the world.

    When I saw this story, I was reminded of the so-called “Kitchen Debate” between Nixon and Khrushchev in 1959. At an exhibition in Moscow, the United States constructed a model of an American home with the idea of showing off all that an average American household had. Khrushschev did not appear impressed but the display illustrates one of the ways the United States expanded its power and reach in the second half of the twentieth century: through consumerism and a particular lifestyle.

    Put another way, pursue policies like the United States and the average home could have a kitchen like that one displayed in 1959 or the average resident could shop at a Costco in 2025. Resist the American way of life or be belligerent toward the United States and those things will not be available.

    Just out of curiosity, I searched Google Maps for the Costco locations nearest to the UN Headquarters in Manhattan. There are at least 3 locations within 11 miles. This means when the diplomats and the leaders of the world come together at the UN, getting to Costco might not be too difficult.

    The first presidential candidate from the suburbs

    When Michael Dukakis ran for president in 1988, he did so as governor of Massachusetts and as a suburbanite:

    Photo by Sergei Starostin on Pexels.com

    Dukakis’s suburban origins and issue-oriented style actually served as a major asset with the other constituency that many strategists recognized as key to his and the Democratic Party’s success in the general election. Political consultant and Dukakis adviser Hank Morris saw Dukakis’s upbringing and ethos as important in galvanizing postindustrial suburban professionals in battleground states such as California, Illinois, and New York. Suburban professionals responded favorably to Dukakis’s record about quality-of-life issues like traffic and air pollution, unregulated commercial growth and sprawl, declining schools, and rising drug and crime problems. Morris urged the campaign to further underscore that “he is the first presidential nominee to grow up in the suburbs and to stay there, commuting to work and mowing the lawn and knowing the concerns of suburbanites.” Taking the advice to heart, Dukakis made frequent references to his 1963 Sears snowblower as an emblem of his suburban sensibility and frugality. (275)

    This passage comes toward the end of historian Lily Geismer’s book Don’t Blame Us: Suburban Liberals and the Transformation of the Democratic Party. It serves as a culmination of several decades of history where the actions of suburbanites in Boston suburbs along Route 128 presaged larger changes in the United States.

    Of course, Dukakis lost the election. But Geismer argues that he represented a shift in the Democratic party toward the educated knowledge workers of suburbia. Whereas suburbs had been viewed as conservative and Republican in the immediate postwar era, by the 1980s there were pockets of suburban liberals and today there are numerous Democratic strongholds in suburban areas outside large cities.

    At the same time, Geismer notes that these suburban liberals had particular notions about liberal causes. They tended to promote individual freedom, not addressing structural issues. When asked to transform their own suburban communities for the greater good of the Boston area, these suburban liberals resisted. It is one thing to advocate for liberal causes that might help you; it is another to promote affordable housing in your community.

    I would venture that we see a number of these patterns still playing out today. What happened along Route 128 has happened to varying degree across American suburbs with pockets of high-tech, knowledge industry workers clustering in suburban parts of metropolitan areas. The American suburbs are more diverse than they were in the 1980s. Many of wealthy suburbs with white-collar jobs or workers are not fully open to change or to addressing metropolitan issues or regularly resist what they see as threats to the quality of life the enjoy. The choices suburbanites like to have still gives those with resources options to find communities that they like and then push back against change.

    And when will the United States have its first suburban president, someone born in the suburbs and who identifies with the suburbs?

    An ongoing negative Trump narrative about cities

    President Trump and his political allies continue to discuss cities in particular ways:

    Photo by Moneer Ibrahim on Pexels.com

    When President Donald Trump declared his third presidential candidacy in 2022, he saved his most colorful language for America’s urban areas, bemoaning “the blood-soaked streets of our once-great cities” and adding that “the cities are rotting, and they are indeed cesspools of blood.”

    Later in his campaign, Trump called Milwaukee “horrible” and described Washington, D.C., as a “rat-infested, graffiti-infested shithole.” More recently he said, “These cities, it’s like living in hell.”

    Other Republicans have seized on similar dystopian urban images. When Vice President JD Vance visited New York several years ago, he compared the city to a zombie apocalypse, posting: “I have heard it’s violent and disgusting there. But is it like Walking Dead Season 1 or Season 4?”

    As Trump ramps up the military presence in Washington — and hints that he may move to take over other cities — his crackdown punctuates a frequent Republican message that American cities embody chaos, lawlessness and immorality, despite widespread recent drops in violent crime. With cities increasingly liberal and rural stretches ever more conservative, Republicans have a growing incentive to attack urban areas as the epitome of all that is wrong with America…

    Trump’s rhetoric culminates a long history of American politicians casting cities as hotbeds of vice and social disorder, said Michael Kazin, a historian at Georgetown University and author of “The Populist Persuasion: An American History.” Left-wing populists have often been dismayed by the vast wealth inequality on display in cities, he said, while right-wing populists have recoiled from the elites, immigrants and minorities who live there.

    This resonates with some Americans because there is a broader and longer history of criticizing cities in the United States. From the beginning, a number of Americans have idealized small town or rural living. The growth of major cities was accompanied by numerous concerns. When asked today, many Americans say they would prefer to live in small towns.

    At the same time, it is hard to imagine the United States today without its big cities and the good things that came with them. A United States without New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago? Or San Francisco, New Orleans, and Cleveland?

    Even if voting patterns by geography seem fairly set in American national elections, it would be interesting to hear more politicians articulate messages that cross these boundaries. Are people living in cities, suburbs, and rural more different than they are similar? Breaking through the existing patterns might just require addressing issues that Americans face or care about regardless of where they live.