Spencer Pratt’s God story collides with a tight L.A. mayor race

Emails full of insults and disbelief have swirled around a Los Angeles mayoral contest, as Spencer Pratt’s claims about a conversation with God resurface alongside a UC Berkeley–L.A. Times poll showing Mayor Karen Bass at 26%, Nithya Raman at 25%, and Pratt at

A burst of late campaign anger didn’t come from a debate stage. It came from people who wrote in after a column last week—some furious that Spencer Pratt was getting attention, others insisting the only “credentials” that matter are the ones they say voters can feel.

One email, from Steven C., went straight for the jugular: “You’re a left-wing idiot, and … it’s time for you to retire. You’re a joke!!! You always have been!!! God bless Spencer Pratt and the 45th and 47th President of the United States Donald Trump!!!!!”

The writer said he’s been thinking about retiring in response. He also pointed to another thread emerging around Pratt: a claim that the reality TV figure told Vanity Fair he had a chat with God, who said God wants Pratt to be mayor of L.A.

R.W. pushed back on the column’s framing in blunt terms: “You say Spencer has never done anything in his life…What credentials do you have? From what I’ve read about you, you are a lousy commie journalist who has never accomplished anything in your life!!”

Peter was angrier still. The message declared the piece a “hit piece filled with bull—” and ended with a barrage of threats and insults: “You should go f— yourself before someone takes you out. which is the appropriate response to a s—bag like yourself. So please f— off and drop dead, which is exactly what you deserve.”.

The column’s author said he had “dropped dead once” after cardiac arrest. and then described what he saw on “the other side. ” adding that he was told to “snap out of it” because God was going to tell Spencer Pratt to run for mayor. He wrote that all of these were “actual emails” and that more came in.

Even with that noise, the commentary also returns to what has voters gripping their phones and calendars: frustration with City Hall—homelessness, the Palisades inferno, and budget issues that squeeze basic city services—alongside a mayoral race that is too close to call.

In the latest UC Berkeley–L.A. Times poll, Mayor Karen Bass stands at 26%, Nithya Raman at 25%, and Spencer Pratt at 22%. The numbers are tight enough, the writer says, that no candidate is reaching the 50% needed to win outright. With the primary ending and the election on Tuesday. the possibility of a top-two runoff hangs in the air—and the path forward isn’t clear.

The commentary then pivots to five questions it argues voters should keep in front of them, starting with a simple one: who knows Los Angeles best.

Los Angeles. the writer says. has 114 distinct neighborhoods across 470 square miles—“10 times the size of San Francisco”—with an estimated 220 languages spoken. With diversity described as “a defining characteristic” and the population roughly “half” Latino. the author says it’s a “shame” there is no Latino candidate for mayor. especially given “the raids and roundups by President Trump.”.

The writer argues a mayor doesn’t need to speak all six languages or know every corner. but residents need to feel “seen and heard” and represented. From that angle. the commentary paints Bass as the candidate with the city knowledge that comes from the job: “By virtue of her job the last four years. ” she “knows the city best. ” though the author adds that Bass’s unfavorability rating is a “big problem.”.

It also weighs Raman and homelessness differently than Pratt. Raman is described as “well-versed on homelessness policy” and “spot-on about the need for greater urgency,” but the writer cites complaints from her district that “they haven’t seen enough of her.”

Pratt. the author says. has targeted what he calls municipal failure. and then places a comparative question around him: could an outsider be “a tourist in his own city?” The commentary points to Rick Caruso. who ran against Bass last time and was “comfortable whether he was in the Valley. South L.A. or anywhere in between.” The writer says Caruso connected with people, and asks whether Pratt can do the same.

The next question turns to candidates outside the top three. In the same UC Berkeley–L.A. Times poll cited by the author. minister and housing activist Rae Huang has 9% and former educational technology businessman Adam Miller has 5%. The commentary characterizes both as “virtual unknowns” who “neither had a legit chance of winning. ” but could still act as spoilers for the top three.

The writer says he spoke to both and urges undecided voters to read up before they vote. For Huang. he points to her website’s opening line: “Homes are for people. not profit.” For Miller. the commentary describes an attempt to bring business success to City Hall. while also saying he has nonprofit work with veterans and homelessness and that. “when you consider his policy agenda along with his nonprofit work. ” he’s a “better candidate than Pratt.”.

The commentary then addresses a charge that keeps surfacing in reader messages: “Democrats ruined L.A. and California, right?”

The author says he hears the argument often enough that he compares it to counting nickels. insisting that “By 101 measures. Los Angeles is one of the great cities of the world” and that California has built the “world’s fourth-largest economy while leading on climate change.” From there. he says apocalyptic diagnoses are “a bit off the mark.” He also adds that local elections are nonpartisan: voters don’t run for mayor as a D or an R.

Still, he doesn’t dismiss the idea that politics matters. He writes that it’s true Democrats and their policies “rule the day. ” and that they “have a lot to answer for.” But he presses a comparison: would the same critics blame Republicans for homelessness and other problems in conservative cities like Fresno and Bakersfield?.

On housing, poverty, healthcare, and streets occupied by people who are addicted or mentally ill, the commentary argues that failures “go back decades,” involve “all levels of government,” and “cross party lines.”

After those arguments, the piece doesn’t read like surrender. It insists the author hasn’t given up on Los Angeles. writing that after pointing out Pratt seemed “unaware” of the complexities and “structural limits of mayoral power. ” readers suggested he was the one giving up. He rejects that and says he cares enough to hold leaders accountable—and to scrutinize candidates he sees as “posers and pretenders.”.

The closing advice is straightforward: “Fix what’s broken, celebrate what works and take responsibility for what doesn’t.” Then comes another direct appeal to Pratt—framed as a challenge to the “conversation with God” claim.

“Spencer. give me a call. ” the writer says. asking why Pratt can’t share “more details.” He asks whether God scolded him for referring to the mayor as Karen “Basura. ” which the author says means trash in Spanish. He also asks whether God advised Pratt to pull out of the ‘28 Olympics or offered advice on filling potholes and fixing sidewalks.

“If you’re having regular conversations about City Hall with the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,” the writer adds, “we’re dying to know: On homelessness, what would Jesus do?”

For all the furious emails and the surreal framing. the practical reality remains in the poll numbers and the calendar: Mayor Karen Bass at 26%. Nithya Raman at 25%. and Spencer Pratt at 22%. with Tuesday’s election threatening to settle—by a hair—who gets the next opportunity to take power in Los Angeles.

Los Angeles mayor race Spencer Pratt Karen Bass Nithya Raman UC Berkeley-LA Times poll homelessness Palisades inferno Rick Caruso Rae Huang Adam Miller