Something stinks in Los Angeles, and I don’t just mean the homeless encampments. A candidate who trailed on election night has somehow clawed her way into second place, powered almost entirely by ballots that showed up after Election Day. The math doesn't add up. The timing doesn't add up. And the candidate who stands to lose the most is the one who wasn't supposed to be in contention in the first place. How does that happen?
Let’s be honest, Spencer Pratt was always a long-shot in the Los Angeles mayoral race. That said, he ran on a groundbreaking platform. He promised to actually fix the city's catastrophic crime and homelessness crises, you know, something that Democrats had proven they couldn’t do. And guess what? The polls showed that message resonated. Things were actually looking pretty good for him.
And, sure enough, on election night, he held second place. Then the mail-in ballots kept coming, and City Councilmember Nithya Raman, who was trailing in third place, kept climbing. By Sunday, Raman sat at 27.1%, and Pratt had slipped to 26.7%, with both chasing a November runoff spot against incumbent Mayor Karen Bass, who had a distant lead.
Make no mistake about it, the numbers are screwy. Raman pulled in just 20% of the pre-Election Day mail-in votes. But among ballots that arrived after Election Day, she suddenly grabbed 37%.
Mail-ins arriving before Election Day:
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) June 7, 2026
🔵 Bass: 38.1%
🔴 Pratt: 27.9%
🔵 Raman: 20%
Mail-ins arriving after Election Day:
🔵 Raman: 37% (+17% surge)
🔵 Bass: 34.9% (-3% drop)
🔴 Pratt: 19% (-9% drop)
Who are we kidding here? This is fraud.
Robby Starbuck pointed out that there's no historical precedent for a third-place candidate surging days after Election Day to overtake the second-place candidate. None.
ChatGPT can’t find a single example of a 3rd place candidate surging, days AFTER Election Day, to overtake 2nd place.
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) June 7, 2026
It couldn’t find 1 example in all of American history.
That’s what’s happening with Nithya Raman & Spencer Pratt.
Los Angeles has 3rd world country elections. pic.twitter.com/sptszVLLSa
That doesn't mean it's impossible. It means it's worth asking hard questions, and right now, nobody in the mainstream media seems interested in asking them.
ICYMI: Democrats and the 'But Trump' Excuse
Everything about the way this race has unfolded stinks. The late-arriving ballot surge, the convenient timing, the complete reversal of the election-night results… it all smells like fraud designed to shut Pratt out of the runoff election.
But here's the thing: the ballot irregularities aren't even the most troubling story coming out of this race. They’re bad, don’t get me wrong. But the real gut punch is that Karen Bass finished first. She led the field. In a city still scarred by the Palisades wildfires, a disaster her administration bungled so badly it should have ended her career, voters rewarded her with 34.7% of the vote and a guaranteed runoff spot. She was always expected to make it, and that tells you everything you need to know about how Democrat voters think.
Bass's mishandling of the wildfire response was a failure of basic governance. Homes were destroyed. Families lost everything. Her decisions made it worse. In any rational political environment, that record makes you unviable. In Los Angeles, it apparently makes you the frontrunner. Democrat voters in this city simply don't punish their own for incompetence, and they certainly don't punish them for corruption.
In fact, this pattern isn't limited to Los Angeles. Barack Obama famously declared that if he hadn't fixed the economy by 2012, he'd be a one-term president.
“If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition,” he said.
He didn't, but he wasn't. Democrat voters shrugged and pulled the lever again for a failed president. Bass is running the same playbook, and it's working.
If Bass wins the general election in November, she'll walk away with the clear message that she got away with it: the wildfires, the homelessness, the crime, corruption, incompetence, all of it. No consequences. And she'll govern the next four years knowing the voters will take whatever she gives them.
Los Angeles voters had the power to demand better. They're choosing not to use it. Whatever comes next for that city, they've earned it.
