Mayor-Elect Courts Billionaires for Transition While Condemning Wealth Inequality and Real Estate Development Practices
Mamdani’s Embrace of Wealthy Donors Contradicts Socialist Messaging
As Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani prepares to take office, campaign finance records reveal a striking tension between his public rhetoric against billionaires and his active cultivation of the ultra-wealthy to fund his transition efforts. While Mamdani built his campaign largely on denouncing the wealthy and promising to tax billionaires aggressively, recent filings show he has engaged in high-profile fundraising events with corporate and financial elite, raising over 3 million dollars to date toward a stated goal of 4 million dollars for transition and inauguration expenses.
Billionaire Support and Multi-Million Dollar Contributions
A sophisticated donor network emerged supporting Mamdani’s transition, including several billionaires. Elizabeth Simons, daughter of the late billionaire hedge fund investor James Simons and chair of the Heising-Simons Foundation, donated 250,000 dollars to New Yorkers for Lower Costs, a super PAC backing Mamdani. Tom Preston-Werner, co-founder of GitHub who sold the company to Microsoft for 7.5 billion dollars, donated 20,000 dollars to the same PAC. Both billionaires have publicly committed to the Giving Pledge, which encourages the world’s wealthy to contribute the majority of their fortunes to philanthropic causes. Other notable donors included RocketMoney founders Haroon and Idris Mokhtarzada, and celebrities like Jane Fonda and Cynthia Nixon.
Real Estate Industry Support Despite Public Hostility
Perhaps more revealing than billionaire support is the backing Mamdani received from real estate professionals despite his campaign’s aggressive critique of landlords and developers. According to analysis of campaign finance filings by The Real Deal, between November 5 and November 30 alone, real estate-related donors contributed at least 40,900 dollars to Mamdani’s transition efforts. This represented less than 2 percent of the 2.6 million dollars raised during that period, but it occurred even as the real estate industry as a whole had spent tens of millions opposing Mamdani’s election. Donors included Gideon Friedman, CEO of Beachwold Residential, who had given tens of thousands to Mamdani’s campaign despite the candidate’s promises to freeze rents and restrict landlord profits. Friedman explained that as a multifamily housing developer focused outside the city, Mamdani’s rent freeze policies would not directly affect his business. More importantly, Friedman expressed optimism about Mamdani’s commitment to build 200,000 housing units, arguing that any ambitious housing production justified support despite philosophical disagreements over regulation.
The Bundlers and Upper-Class Progressive Support
Mamdani’s transition received substantial support from wealthy progressive bundlers who raised money from their networks. Brooklyn-based jewelry designer Alexis Bittar served as the top bundler, helping raise nearly 164,000 dollars including his own maximum donation of 3,700 dollars. Neil Barsky, founder of the Marshall Project and filmmaker of the documentary Koch, donated the maximum and helped raise an additional 14,800 dollars. Among the maximum donors were high-end jewelers, media figures, and entertainment industry professionals. The average transition donation reached only 94 dollars, significantly below the averages for Mamdani’s predecessors. Eric Adams’ transition averaged 1,219 dollars per donor, while Bill de Blasio’s averaged 2,392 dollars. Yet the overall base of 244 maximum donors contributed nearly 902,800 dollars, representing approximately 35 percent of the transition’s total fundraising haul.
The Contradiction Between Rhetoric and Reality
Campaign messages from Mamdani’s team emphasized that transitions typically rely on wealthy donors and special interests, but Mamdani claimed he wanted to fund his transition the same way he won office, with grassroots support. Yet the evidence contradicts this narrative. Mamdani spent significantly more money on transition fundraising than either of his predecessors, eventually raising over 3 million dollars with weeks remaining until he takes office. The donor base included precisely the type of wealthy interests he campaigned against. Some political observers characterized the dynamic as representative of a broader national pattern in which billionaires hedge their political bets by funding both establishment and progressive candidates, ensuring influence regardless of which political faction prevails.
The Nonprofit Channel and Tax Arbitrage
Investigative reporting by independent sources noted that sophisticated wealthy donors use nonprofit foundations as channels to fund candidates indirectly while claiming tax deductions. This tax arbitrage approach allows wealthy donors to claim a deduction for political influence while maintaining plausible deniability about direct campaign financing. Mamdani appears to have benefited from such arrangements, though the full scope of funding flowing through nonprofit intermediaries remains difficult to trace given the complexity of foundation structures and the multiple layers of donation channels. Political analysts note that such sophisticated financing mechanisms mean the true sources of support for ostensibly grassroots campaigns often remain hidden from public scrutiny.
Meeting With Trump and Industry Acceptance
In a move that surprised many observers, Mamdani met with President Donald Trump approximately two weeks before taking office and declared a partnership aimed at lowering prices for New Yorkers. Since that meeting, Mamdani has not issued public statements criticizing Trump via his social media accounts. The apparent accommodation with the Trump administration suggests that Mamdani’s populist socialist positioning may moderate considerably once he takes executive office. Real estate insiders and business observers suggested the transition’s early tone indicated Mamdani would engage pragmatically with business interests rather than pursuing the aggressive regulatory agenda suggested by his campaign rhetoric. Whether his administration’s policies will align with his socialist campaign promises or with the interests of the wealthy donors now backing his transition efforts remains an open question.
