Did YIMBYS and neolibs vote for a guy who opposes market-rate housing because he said “abundance” once?

trying to make sense of the support i've seen mamdani get from the people on this sub. he won, so clearly a lot of y'all in nyc actually voted for him, despite the fact that his proposed policies seem directly at odds with what most neolibs claim to believe.

this mf is

– explicitly anti-market rate housing

– opposed to upzonings unless the housing is 100% publicly owned

– aligned with DSA's decommodification agenda

– a supporter of policies like rent control and tenant rights of return that would make most new development difficult if not impossible

– publicly skeptical of private housing development, even when it increases supply.

he went on a podcast and basically said socialism is abundance, and somehow this convinced a bunch of market urbanists that he was on their side. but his platform is neither pro-growth or pro market. in fact, his economic thinking is totally disconnected from mainstream economics. there is no engagement with incentives, tradeoffs, housing elasticity, anything.

and, like certain recent populist presidents, he has a habit of proposing sweeping, demagogic changes that he has no legal authority to enact. he floats ideas that give his base good feels with out regard for feasibility. he is living in a political and economic fantasy land.

i'm not even gonna talk about his public safety proposals, which have the potential to enshittify the city beyond belief.

so what's the deal? is this sub, or neolibs in general, just more way more leftist-curious than i thought? are people not paying attention to what he stands for? am i wrong? is mamdani actually a pro-growth market urbanist? i would be happy to be proven wrong.