This type of binary thinking is what prevents actual problem solving and allows existing problems to fester. One can be a supporter of free markets and still understand there are instances where free markets either will not work or will not be optimal if not reigned in by other policy. Economics is inherently messy and cannot be put into the "either/or" box that today's polarized society attempts to fit it into. Even Adam Smith (the big "free markets guy") understood this and discussed potential problems inherent with the free market in his book, The Wealth of Nations. Good economists understand that there is no binary right or wrong answer in their field, which is why even those with opposing theories still respect each other's work and learn from each other. They realize there will always be exceptions and problems with any "pure" theory, and that no pure theory will work in practice. John Maynard Keynes and Friedrich Hayek are two of the most famous examples of men with opposing theories and neither of these theories is completely "right" or completely "wrong." A combination of their theories, among many other (often conflicting) theories are used in practical economic problem solving.
My point is that it's dangerous to conflate economic thinking with binary political thinking. Economic problem solving would function much better if the wrench of politics weren't constantly thrown at it.
A significant portion of our population thinks the free market is ALWAYS better. I think he was just pointing out how clearly that isn't true. I doubt he's advocating for actually running it into the ground.