Was Mamdani's early endorsement of Hochul a gambit?

This is not an apologetic, just a discussion. If you get in the comments acting like I'm in direct support of Mamdani you'll look like a fool cause you are responding to the headline and not the post

Just a couple days after offering governor Hochul an endorsement with seemingly no concessions, and [rightfully] receiving criticism from his left flank, it seems he has cornered the liberals.

There is a legal mandate for NYC to have a balanced budget (as well as a practical one, as they do jot issue their own currency. In order to cover the multi-billion dollar shortfall, a tax must be raised. Mamdani has presented two options: either goc rnor Hochul can raise a tax on the wealthiest 33,000 new yorkers, or Mamdani will be forced to raise property taxes, which will affect everybody.

Needless to say, the property tax is dramatically unpopular. Between Mamdani's endorsement, and the opportunity to make a popular decision instead of an unpopular one, Hochul has a lot to gain by taking the easy road here. She also has a lot to lose if she doesn't.

• was this mamdani's 4-D chess all along?
• will Hochul be follow through with mild wealth redistribution because shes a bit cornered?
• can Mamdani extract other concessions this year by threatening to revoke his endorsement? In a way that would be bigger news, right?

If he holds his endorsement back in exchange for concessions, liberals will push "he isn't a real democrat, he is a useless radical socialist who is going to ruin everything!"

Instead he is a team player and has taken the early high ground. Now it is up to the establishment to step up to his level and support his popular agenda. Mamdani can withdraw his endorsement and torch them later on if they don't offer anything.

Also, the NYC local news has been gross. "Mamdani proposes raising property taxes to balance the budget" with no further context, of course.