Alleged Paid Votes On Skid Row Raise Concerns In LA Primary

The Los Angeles mayoral primary left a lot of people angry and suspicious when Spencer Pratt’s early second-place showing evaporated and reports surfaced that some homeless residents on Skid Row said they were paid to cast ballots for the left-leaning candidates.

The jungle primary system in Los Angeles already raises eyebrows because the top two finishers move on no matter party labels, and this year the results swung in ways that left a number of conservative voters uneasy. Pratt supporters watched an initial lead shrink as successive batches of ballots were counted, and that pattern has only deepened distrust among those who feel the process lacked transparency. When residents of downtown Los Angeles started claiming they were paid small amounts to vote for certain candidates, it fed the suspicion that the counting and outreach deserved a harder look.

A short video circulating from downtown showed several homeless people describing small payments in exchange for voting choices, and that clip spread quickly among Pratt backers. “It was like two bucks,” said one unidentified woman who claimed she was paid $2 to vote for Bass. “Yeah, they come out here all the time,” she added. Those lines landed hard because they tied a familiar image of targeted outreach to the actual mechanics of the vote.

Some people named specifics on camera. One man said he bargained his way to a slightly higher payment and was told he could choose between a couple of candidates but not Pratt. “They gave you an optional choice,” Shepherd said. A woman who identified herself as Rene Johnson described being paid five dollars but sounded unsure about what she signed. ‘I was just trying to make 5 bucks, you know? But I didn’t do the fraud.’

Those clips were recorded and shared by local content creators who said they were tipped off by people working in the area, and the recordings prompted immediate calls for official review. “Everybody said it was normal,” the content creator said to the Post. At the same time, some initial checks found discrepancies: one woman’s claim about voting on Skid Row did not match the voter rolls where she said she voted, and officials pointed out there were mismatches that needed closer inspection.

The Justice Department announced it would look into accusations of voter fraud related to California’s local races, and federal attention only underscores how seriously these allegations are being treated. In one specific instance, investigators noted that a claim that Pratt received no votes in a particular tranche of ballots was . That kind of detail matters because it speaks directly to how ballots are batched and reported during the count.

California’s slow counting process also fueled skepticism across the political spectrum, but conservatives in particular saw the delays as a cue that something could be wrong. Officials say the timelines and procedures are lawful and that mail and provisional ballots take longer to process here than in some other states. Yet when statistical anomalies appear and community members say they were actively courted and paid, the public has every right to demand clear answers and faster transparency.

There were reports pointing to concentrated voter registrations tied to a shelter in Venice, and those claims raised alarms about organized registration efforts and the flow of money into local community programs. One local account suggested that a shelter had received significant funding linked to a city council member’s efforts, and critics argued those registrations should be scrutinized for integrity. Others noted that the number of votes associated with Skid Row and nearby areas would not have closed the gap between Pratt and his opponent without additional explanations, and that gap analysis is still an open question for investigators and watchdogs.

For conservative voters who watched a candidate lose ground in real time and then see claims of street-level vote-buying, the reaction is straightforward: demand a thorough, public, and timely investigation. Elections survive only when people trust them, and trust is earned by transparency, accountability, and swift answers when troubling reports surface. Officials at every level should move quickly to explain the chain of custody, the count methodology, and how outreach in vulnerable communities was conducted, so voters can either be reassured or, if wrongdoing is found, see those responsible held to account.

Ultimately this is about confidence in the mechanics of democracy, and the way forward is clear to anyone who wants fair play: full audits, open records, and prosecutions where the evidence supports it. There should be no shortcuts and no special treatment for political operatives, because Americans deserve elections that are clean and obvious, not ones that leave citizens guessing about the outcome or the integrity of the process.

There was a claim circulating on social media about an election night ballot update at the Los Angeles Registrar of Voters where one candidate received zero votes.

We reviewed official county records. The claim is false. Each candidate received votes in every update.

My office…

— F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) June 6, 2026