Spencer Pratt surges in competitive Los Angeles mayoral race

Spencer Pratt’s run for Los Angeles mayor has moved from spectacle to genuine competition, with the 42-year-old former reality star polling second behind Karen Bass and ahead of Councilmember Nithya Raman in a citywide race that could go to a Nov. 3 runoff if no candidate wins a majority on June 2.

Jimmy Kimmel’s line that “Mayor should not be your first job” captured the disbelief Pratt has triggered, but the numbers show a race shaped by more than punch lines. A May 9-10 Emerson College Polling and Inside California Politics survey put Bass at 30%, Pratt at 22% and Raman at 19%. In an earlier UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs poll released April 3, Bass held 25%, Pratt 11% and Raman 9%, with 40% undecided. By May, that undecided bloc had fallen to 16%, a sign that the field was hardening as voters weighed three very different candidates.

Pratt entered the race in January after the 2025 Palisades fire destroyed his family home. The blaze, which destroyed 5,800 homes, became the central force in his campaign as he accused Los Angeles City Hall of failing residents. Bass has faced criticism over her wildfire response, even as her administration has taken executive actions and approvals to speed Pacific Palisades rebuilding. The contest has therefore become a referendum on competence, not just personality, with disaster recovery and basic governance at the center of the campaign.

The race also reflects Los Angeles’ political structure. The city has not elected a Republican mayor since Richard Riordan won in 1993 and served two terms, and Pratt is a registered Republican running in a heavily Democratic city. That makes his rise striking even in a place accustomed to celebrity politics. It also shows how a fractured electorate and widespread frustration can open space for a candidate with no prior political experience to argue that he can shake up city hall.

Pratt’s family has underscored the tension around his candidacy. His sister, Stephanie Pratt, publicly urged Angelenos not to vote for him, saying Los Angeles does not need another unqualified and inexperienced mayor, even as she praised his advocacy on wildfire issues. That split captures the larger question surrounding his campaign: whether voters see a political novice as a liability or as a blunt instrument for a city that many believe has been poorly served by its own establishment.