The latest Berkeley IGS poll shakes up the Los Angeles mayoral contest: Karen Bass’s lead has evaporated into a three-way scramble with Nithya Raman and Spencer Pratt trading ground, and turnout looks like the deciding factor in who survives the June primary and who makes a runoff. Voters are signaling frustration on crime, corruption, and the homeless crisis, while Pratt’s unconventional campaign is drawing energy from people fed up with the status quo. The numbers are tight enough that a motivated Republican base could matter more than usual in a deeply blue city. Keep an eye on late shifts and which camp actually shows up on election day.
The poll, taken May 19-24, puts Bass at 26 percent, Raman at 25 percent, and Pratt at 22 percent, with undecideds down to roughly 10 percent of 1,913 registered voters. That collapse of undecided voters from March’s 26 percent means preferences are hardening fast, and the margins between the top three sit well inside the margin of error. Those facts alone make this race a raw lesson in turnout politics, not messaging exercises or ad budgets.
Pratt’s backers are clear-eyed about what drives them to the polls: cleaning up waste and political corruption, plus a heavy focus on crime and public safety. That’s a straightforward conservative playbook translated into city terms, and it’s resonating with voters who want results rather than platitudes. A concentrated, fired-up minority can move the needle in a low-turnout primary in a city where nearly everyone expects Democrats to win everything by default.
Bass and Raman voters, by contrast, cluster around traditional progressive priorities like immigrant protections, moving people indoors, and expanding affordable housing. Those are big-ticket items that require complex solutions and steady funding, which tends to reward incumbency—unless the public starts counting shortcomings instead of intentions. When the public judges outcomes instead of promises, narratives shift fast.
In hypothetical head-to-head matchups, the poll shows Bass holding a strong edge over Pratt, with an 18-point lead in a one-on-one scenario and about 12 percent still undecided. But that doesn’t capture the dynamism of primaries and the reality that any candidate who makes a runoff can reset the race. Raman’s numbers against Pratt tell a different story, with Raman at 45 percent to Pratt’s 28 percent, leaving a sizable undecided bloc that could break either way depending on events between June and November.
“It’s going to boil down to turnout.” That line isn’t campaign spin; it nails the math of this contest. When margins are thin and undecideds are shrinking, the candidate who gets supporters out of the house will short-circuit pundit predictions and redefine what seemed like a safe path for the incumbent. That’s where grassroots energy and clear, simple appeals to basic voter concerns—safety, corruption, accountability—matter most.
Pratt is an unusual candidate for Los Angeles, and the poll notes that reality while also showing he is generating actual enthusiasm in pockets of the electorate. Although the mayoral race is nonpartisan, Pratt, a Republican, is running in a city where less than 15 percent of residents are registered Republicans. That imbalance makes his campaign uphill, but it also makes any swing in turnout disproportionately meaningful.
Political operatives and strategists should watch the undecided voters closely—10 percent in this poll can become a kingmaker if they break late and en masse. Mobilizing those voters often depends on tangible events: a scandal, a high-profile crime, or a sudden policy failure. Campaigns that focus on concrete fixes rather than abstract promises will have a clearer path to converting fence-sitters into actual ballots.
The takeaway for conservatives is simple: invest in turnout, not just headlines. In a city dominated by one party, targeted enthusiasm and a crisp message on corruption, safety, and quality of life can turn a 22 percent polling figure into something far more consequential. For the incumbent and the progressive challenger, the danger is complacency; for an insurgent, the opportunity is real if it translates into voters showing up.
“You’ve got three very different candidates, each with very different constituencies, all within the margin of error. It’s going to boil down to turnout,” Mark DiCamillo, the director of Berkeley IGS polls, said about the race and its tight arithmetic.
https://x.com/spencerpratt/status/2009374818471432231?s=20
