Spencer Pratt’s unconventional Los Angeles mayoral bid is rattling the usual players, and BlazeTV’s Liz Wheeler says the panic from Democrats and their celebrity allies shows his campaign is hitting a nerve. Fundraising numbers, filmed reactions from Hollywood, and a public back-and-forth with high-profile critics have turned a reality TV figure into a real political headache for the establishment. Wheeler frames Pratt’s approach as a deliberate strategy aimed at giving disillusioned Democrats a way out, and that message is driving the latest skirmishes. The race feels raw, messy, and very much alive.
Liz Wheeler nails the moment: “The Democrats are so scared of Spencer Pratt’s strategy. And you combine that with the most recent fundraising numbers — in the last month, Spencer Pratt has raised 10 times as much money as Karen Bass,” Wheeler explains. That line cut through the usual campaign chatter because it points to something tangible — cash — and the way money changes expectations. Viewers are hearing a clear argument that the established power structure is suddenly nervous about an insurgent upset. It’s blunt messaging designed to make people rethink the inevitability of the incumbent.
Pratt has reportedly pulled in $2.72 million in the last month, while Mayor Bass (D) raised $283,000. Those raw figures are the kind of detail that turns chatter into headlines, and Wheeler leans into it to show momentum. She follows the data with a confident read on what it means on the ground for voters and for the Democratic base in L.A. The implication is plain: when money moves, the map of the race shifts.
“The tide has turned towards Spencer Pratt. That amount of money combined with this strategy, this brilliant political strategy that Spencer Pratt is now engaging in — giving Democrats in L.A. this off-ramp to vote for him,” Wheeler says. She’s arguing that Pratt’s plan isn’t random chaos but a calculated bid to peel away people who feel locked into a party that no longer represents them. This is a campaign that aims straight for voter frustration and offers an escape hatch labeled with a familiar face.
Wheeler doesn’t stop at cash and strategy; she points the finger at Hollywood for being rolled out as a defensive line. “Hollywood is the Democrats’ secret weapon,” she explains, recalling that “very cringey video that celebrities put together during COVID.” The point is to show that when the policy case is weak, star power gets pulled forward as a kind of political bandage. Celebrities can influence impressions, but they don’t answer for city governance.
The article pulls clips and comments from familiar faces trying to close the door on another reality-star moment in mayoral politics. “We’ve already done that. We’re not going to do that again,” Rinna said. “Listen, I’m a reality person,” she continued. “You wouldn’t want me as mayor. … I just think we did that. Let’s have somebody that’s already been mayor. The mayor of San Jose or whoever. I don’t even know.” Those bites show the instinctive recoil from a repeat of celebrity-to-office trajectories, and they give opponents soundbites to use.
Not every reaction is polished. Comedian Drew Carey fired off a blunt social post: “Anyone who votes for, or endorses Spencer Prattfall for Mayor of LA needs to get their head out of their ass. I understand being angry/unsatisfied, but at least get behind someone competent and not some serial scammer without a soul or moral compass. F**k this guy already.” Harsh words like that feed the controversy and keep the story in the news cycle. Pratt answered in kind on social media, turning the exchange into another headline-grabbing moment.
Pratt pushed back publicly: “Isn’t it weird how the two comedians histrionically lashing out against me are both in the ‘Epstein files’? What are the odds?” He attached a screenshot of an email mentioning Carey from the files. That response shifts the narrative away from policy and into personal counterpunches, which is exactly the kind of volatile back-and-forth that attracts attention. It also underlines how modern campaigns live as much in social exchanges as in debate halls.
Wheeler frames the broader strategy in stark terms: “Let me tell you what is happening here. The Democrats are so scared. They’re so desperate because they can’t run on any policy. They can’t run on Karen Bass’ record. They can’t run on Nithya Raman’s ideology,” Wheeler says. Her take is that the party is scrambling, not because of one soundbite or one celebrity, but because they lack a persuasive governing case. That claim forces the debate onto competence and track records.
“So what they do instead, as their sort of final move — this is one week before the election … they try to use famous people to invoke groupthink among voters,” she adds. Bringing out high-profile voices is a last-ditch effort to shape perceptions, and according to Wheeler it’s a sign of panic, not strength. Whether voters buy the celebrity-led argument or prefer a disruptor with momentum remains the real question as election day nears.
