Hmm, I'm not sure that's accurate. No disagreement that the "homeowner-aligned conservatives" are progressive by national standards, but NIMBY's in general are

Hmm, I'm not sure that's accurate. No disagreement that the "homeowner-aligned conservatives" are progressive by national standards, but NIMBY's in general are progressive by national standards, because most NIMBYism occurs within progressive cities like SF. Cities are progressive enclaves even in conservative areas, so almost by definition, NIMBYs will be more progressive than average. So when I say conservative vs progressive, I mean relative to each other, or the center within a given city, rather than to the national average. I admit this is probably a confusing way to put it. I think in this article, Noah is referring specifically to this far left. For much of the article, he references Current Affairs, for example, which is a far left magazine. In the replies to his tweets about this, folks also mentioned Sunrise, which is a far left environmental org. Regarding your original point, re: the progressive left in Seattle, I think the far left is more in coalition with YIMBYs, while the business-oriented politicians are in coalition with the NIMBYs. This isn't to say there aren't NIMBY leftists, just that they don't really have a lot of power at the moment, because they have to work with the YIMBYs. As far as actual conservatives in Seattle politics, there are very few (maybe none?) remaining.