Los Angeles mayor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

People on the right are looking for a savior. They inflate candidates who have zero experience, zero knowledge, and zero chance of winning.

Then, when they do lose, they claim “election interference.” 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

It's really hard to get through to a skull as intentionally thick as yours. Let's try this again. The question you should be asking is why Democrats feel entitled to do nothing about deteriorating cities and then think voters should keep voting for them. Does that kind of entitlement sound like a winning strategy to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pratt is gonna win this one. She is an awful candidate.

He won’t win. Pratt already said he would let ICE loose on LA.

Further all the rich people who support Pratt live in incorporated cities that are not part of Los Angeles! (Eg Beverly Hills, Santa Monica)

Trump wants Pratt to run because he can’t stand having to share the spotlight with Bass at the 2028 Olympics

Because she looks too much like a ....Mic Obama? Or because she looks similar to K Harris? He held a mag rally at Huntington Beach not too far away he thinks he is going to win

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

It's really hard to get through to a skull as intentionally thick as yours. Let's try this again. The question you should be asking is why Democrats feel entitled to do nothing about deteriorating cities and then think voters should keep voting for them. Does that kind of entitlement sound like a winning strategy to you?

LA doesn't deserve a reality TV show idiot just because their current mayor is a terrible executive who needs to go. Biden was a terrible leader who needed to go but as we've quickly come to find out since January of 2025, replacing an unfit leader with someone who is both unfit and unhinged is not a winning formula. Why can't Bass be met with competent competitors who are deserving and qualified for the position?

Sounds like the LA political scene is a microcosm of our national political scene. A race to the bottom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

It's really hard to get through to a skull as intentionally thick as yours. Let's try this again. The question you should be asking is why Democrats feel entitled to do nothing about deteriorating cities and then think voters should keep voting for them. Does that kind of entitlement sound like a winning strategy to you?

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

People on the right are looking for a savior. They inflate candidates who have zero experience, zero knowledge, and zero chance of winning.

Then, when they do lose, they claim “election interference.” 😂

Wow, the projection is off the charts with this one ^^. You just described people on the left, to a T.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

It's really hard to get through to a skull as intentionally thick as yours. Let's try this again. The question you should be asking is why Democrats feel entitled to do nothing about deteriorating cities and then think voters should keep voting for them. Does that kind of entitlement sound like a winning strategy to you?

DP. You’re a fool if you think Spencer, a person in his 40s with no employment history, is going to do anything about deteriorating cities or…anything. All he will do is go on tv.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

It's really hard to get through to a skull as intentionally thick as yours. Let's try this again. The question you should be asking is why Democrats feel entitled to do nothing about deteriorating cities and then think voters should keep voting for them. Does that kind of entitlement sound like a winning strategy to you?

DP. You’re a fool if you think Spencer, a person in his 40s with no employment history, is going to do anything about deteriorating cities or…anything. All he will do is go on tv.

Safe to say, anyone supporting Pratt or Bass is a complete and utter idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pratt is gonna win this one. She is an awful candidate.

Great, another reality star who has never worked a day in his life. I’m sure that’s exactly what Los Angeles needs.

Bass is a radical, pro-crime Marxist who has ruined L.A.

Last year, LA literally had the lowest murder rate since 1959. What in god’s name are you babbling about?

You know who is a crook? Spencer Pratt demanding a government bailout while not paying his insurance bill.

It's a MAGA talking point. "[Democratic candidate] is a pro-crime Marxist/Socialist/Demonrat that's ruined [major city]"

I thought “radical, socialist, democratic” rolled off the tongue easier. I guess now that Fox viewers are liking what Mamdani is doing, they need to up the ante with Marxist.

[Anonymous]

Can anyone familiar with the matter say why the other leftist candidate didn’t get much traction? She is a Harvard and MIT educated urban planner, you would think people would be into it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pratt is gonna win this one. She is an awful candidate.

Great, another reality star who has never worked a day in his life. I’m sure that’s exactly what Los Angeles needs.

Bass is a radical, pro-crime Marxist who has ruined L.A.

Last year, LA literally had the lowest murder rate since 1959. What in god’s name are you babbling about?

You know who is a crook? Spencer Pratt demanding a government bailout while not paying his insurance bill.

It's a MAGA talking point. "[Democratic candidate] is a pro-crime Marxist/Socialist/Demonrat that's ruined [major city]"

I thought “radical, socialist, democratic” rolled off the tongue easier. I guess now that Fox viewers are liking what Mamdani is doing, they need to up the ante with Marxist.

+1

Pratt and Bass would be most appropriately labeled "idiots who shouldn't be mayor of LA".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

Because voters know all of this, and look at just how bad things are in LA under Karen Bass, and think “well, he can’t be worse than Bass.” That’s why.

I don’t think you realize just how bad things are in L.A.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone familiar with the matter say why the other leftist candidate didn’t get much traction? She is a Harvard and MIT educated urban planner, you would think people would be into it.

Her positions on homelessness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure what the people here are debating whether Spencer Pratt deserves a pay love are not getting. The popularity of his campaign is fueled by voters who are sick of do-nothing Democrats running the city into the ground.

Because why do voters support this strange man who has based his entire narrative as a “do nothing?” No real job, irresponsibly spends tons of money based on the irrational belief that the world was ending, expects a bailout after foolishly choosing to live in a home in an area where he apparently cannot (or will not) pay for insurance. This guy is a terrible decision-maker as the head of his household and he’s supposed to make prudent decisions for millions of people in one of the biggest cities on earth? Why are we even debating this??

Because voters know all of this, and look at just how bad things are in LA under Karen Bass, and think “well, he can’t be worse than Bass.” That’s why.

I don’t think you realize just how bad things are in L.A.

Yup, I remember people thinking about how awful Biden's leadership was and then they doubled down on their stupidness by electing Trump to a second term to replace Biden. Replacing Bass with Pratt would be a similar scenario. Bass needs to go but choose the replacement wisely. Leadership matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone familiar with the matter say why the other leftist candidate didn’t get much traction? She is a Harvard and MIT educated urban planner, you would think people would be into it.

Because voters get one vote and strategically went with Bass because name id and incumbency because they did want Pratt to get first place because Dems (once again) split the vote. Either move to ranked choice voting or the State party needs to become stronger and get those polling 5% and under to drop out.