Los Angeles voters outside a Westchester market made one thing plain: homelessness is the issue driving this mayoral contest, and residents are split on who can fix it. Some back a brash outsider, others stick with the mayor despite doubts, and a handful are openly pessimistic about any candidate’s plan. The race has become a referendum on public safety, enforcement, and whether a nonpolitician can shake up a system many believe is broken.
Shelley Zuckerman said it simply: “Love him,” when asked about reality television star and independent candidate Spencer Pratt, and she made clear homelessness is her main motivation. She pointed to Pratt’s outsider status as a reason to trust his passion over polished politicians. “The fact that he’s not a politician, so he may or may not be a liar, we don’t know that yet, and I know that he wants to do something for LA that the politicians have been saying they’re going to do and then don’t,” Zuckerman added. “And I know politics works, that once you get in there you can’t always do what you want to do, but at least he’s got the passion.”
When asked whether crime factored into their choice, Shelley’s husband, Saul, cut to the chase with one word: “Of course.” The couple also said they plan to support Republican Steve Hilton for governor, signaling they want more law-and-order leadership up and down the ballot. Their attitude reflects a wider appetite for candidates who promise to restore basic safety and clear public spaces.
Patrick Reynolds, a neighborhood resident, was blunt about his options, calling Pratt a “clown” and saying he is “not happy with any of the candidates.” Still, Reynolds said he voted for incumbent Mayor Karen Bass “a little reluctantly,” choosing the known quantity over a gamble. He pointed to local parks turning unsafe as evidence that current approaches to homelessness and public safety are failing.
Diane, another voter, put homelessness at the top of her list with a clear nod to effort over spectacle: “Homelessness for sure,” she said, and added, “That’s number one on my list, and I think she’s tried very hard to fix that problem. It’s a big problem, I know. And I just think she is down to earth. She’s not some rich billionaire, which I appreciate.” Diane’s preference for stability extends to the governor’s race, where she said she’s with a candidate she believes understands ordinary people.
Dan Madden, who lives in nearby Manhattan Beach, said he would back Pratt if he could vote in the city proper. “That’d be my man,” Madden said, citing two decades of decline he blames on city leadership. “It’s getting worse,” he added, pointing to recurring cleanups that fail to stick and public spaces that revert to disorder.
Madden described what many residents see: temporary sweeps, brief improvements, and then a rapid return of the same problems. “They cleaned up here and there. Spots, especially along the beach, coastline, you see it cleaned up. Two months later, everybody’s back,” he observed, underlining frustration with short-term fixes. That frustration fuels support for candidates promising tougher enforcement and clearer rules.
Pratt is a registered Republican running as an independent, and he stands against incumbent Karen Bass and City Councilmember Nithya Raman, who identifies as a socialist. The field reflects a wider ideological split over how to handle homelessness, from enforcement-first proposals to housing-focused reforms that have produced mixed results. Voters are weighing passion and promises against record and experience as election day approaches.
The primary will sort which two candidates move to the November runoff, and the rules are straightforward: finish in the top two or win more than 50 percent to clinch the job outright. With turnout unpredictable and frustration high, this election could reward an outsider or reinforce the incumbent’s mandate depending on how many voters decide to act. The local debate is now a test of whether voters want incremental change or a sharper break from the status quo.
Across these conversations, the common thread is impatience with the way Los Angeles has handled public space and safety, and a hunger for leaders who will act decisively. For many, that means enforcing rules, reclaiming sidewalks and parks, and restoring order so neighborhoods feel livable again. The coming months will show whether the appetite for tougher solutions translates into votes at the ballot box.
