Comments
WESTSIDE - There is no question that the candidacy of reality star Spencer Pratt made this year's mayoral campaign interesting. His off-beat personality, out-of-the-box media, and exceptional use of "AI" brought national media attention to what initially appeared to be a sleepy reelection snooze for incumbent Mayor Karen Bass.
With 2022 mayoral challenger Rick Caruso skipping this year's contest, one wonders if changing demographics
and political realties make it difficult, if not impossible for the billionaire developer to coddle together a winning coalition after spending over $100 million dollars of his own dough to lose by 10 points to Bass four years ago.
In that primary, Caruso garnered 232,490 or 36% for a second-place finish. He would lose the general by 10 points to Bass despite the overwhelming expenditure advantage. Notoriously poll driven, Caruso took a hard look at the political landscape and saw it for what it was, unwinnable no matter how much he could spend.
Like Al Checci, Meg Whitman before him and now Tom Steyer, Caruso refused to make the same flawed political calculation twice.
Voters in California are just not kind electorally speaking to billionaires.
Enter Spencer Pratt.
With Caruso out of the race, a "center right" candidacy could play in a crowded, but undistinguished field until Councilwoman Nythya Raman, the 44-year-old progressive withdrew her support for Bass and jumped in with little fanfare or expectation.
A slow starter, this methodical policy wonk eventually caught and passed Pratt this week, clinching a second-place finish making way for a very competitive general election, ironically trying to court the Pratt vote.
And while Pratt's social media went viral and caught the attention of more people outside of Los Angeles and helped his fundraising ($3.7 million), Pratt peaked at roughly 25%, 10 points down from where Caruso was four years ago as this crusade clearly fell flat in its waning days for various reasons.
In the end, Pratt was a political rebel without a cause, and no specific purpose.
In a city that's 47% Hispanic with no major Hispanic candidate, Pratt thought he could peel off some votes, but it never occurred.
Here are ten reasons why the Pratt experiment while interesting to watch flamed out:
Los Angeles is overwhelmingly Democratic:
Pratt identified as a Republican in a city where Democratic candidates generally have a major electoral advantage despite being a non-partisan contest. No Republican had won citywide since the days of Richard Riordan (1997) and the Trump preference didn't help either.
A strong progressive challenger emerged:
Councilwoman Nithya Raman built a broad coalition and ultimately overtook Pratt for the second runoff spot. Her campaign emphasized reaching voters, while Pratt's media went viral, but wasn't targeted to the LA electorate. This election will now be a contest between traditional & establishment liberals versus this emerging and well organized, progressive left.
Online popularity didn't convert into votes:
Pratt generated enormous social media attention, but digital engagement was not matched by a citywide voter strategy. There was no real GOTV operation to speak of as his campaign machinery was hollow.
Limited campaign infrastructure:
Pratt did not build the traditional campaign organization such as field operations, organizing neighborhood or community networks, nor an experienced political staff—that often matter in local elections where every vote was critical in getting his "undecideds" to the polls.
Support concentrated in specific areas:
His primary backing appeared strongest in specific parts of the Westside and where voters were angry about wildfire recovery but struggled to expand his message into a broader theme across all of Los Angeles.
A lack of governing experience:
Many argued that being a reality TV personality and influencer did not demonstrate the experience necessary to lead a city of nearly four million residents. This was not a solution-based message that resonated. His candidacy to many voters was a risk not worth taking in these difficult times.
Trump endorsement hurt more than helped:
Pratt should have focused on being an outsider free of partisan politics in a non-partisan race. An endorsement from President Trump energized some supporters but alienated others in a blue, Democratic stronghold.
Controversial rhetoric and image:
Pratt's confrontational style, dystopian campaign messaging, and past celebrity reputation limited his appeal to voters looking for more conventional solutions and answers, thus narrowing his appeal with high frequency voters.
Raman & Bass already had established political networks:
Both Mayor Bass and Councilwoman Raman entered the race with existing political organizations, endorsements, and voter relationships that Pratt could not emulate, thus failing to replicate Caruso's 2022 base of support.
Celebrity attention doesn't necessarily translate to reliable electoral support:
Pratt succeeded in making the race a national media story, but national coverage and curiosity did not translate to actual votes to reach the runoff. His appeal waned with the campaign as he finished third with about 25.8% of the vote.
In short, Spencer Pratt built a highly visible online & media-driven campaign, but failed to assemble the broad, citywide coalition and political organization needed to win in a major city where labor, political parties and other special interests are the foundation of winning municipal contests in a city like Los Angeles. Pratt could not effectively influence the various ethnic and religious constituencies that drive support and turnout as well.
In the end, all politics is truly local in strength and scope.
(Nick Antonicello is a thirty-three-year resident of the Westside and covered the various municipal, judicial and state races on the June 2md Primary ballot. A regular contributor to CityWatch LA, he can be reached online at [email protected])
