The new independent ad attacking Spencer Pratt for Los Angeles mayor has stirred more heat than harm, charging him on homelessness, policing and unions while prompting a wave of online reaction that many say could backfire and boost the reality TV star’s candidacy.
The attack ad points fingers at Pratt over policy stances that have dominated the race, and it was paid for by an outside committee tied to labor interests. That spending shows how high the stakes feel in L.A., with organized labor clearly trying to shape the narrative and blunt Pratt’s outsider message.
“Republican Spencer Pratt is the last thing Los Angeles needs for mayor,” the speaker in the video says. “Pratt opposes using taxpayer money to build brand new houses for unhoused neighbors, saying it’s time for the homeless to get help or get out.” The ad’s tone is sharp and unapologetic, and critics on the right say it paints Pratt as too blunt for the city’s sensibilities even as it highlights issues voters care about.
“Pratt thinks L.A. needs thousands more police officers rather than more social workers, and Republican Spencer Pratt thinks public employee unions should have less power, not more,” the ad continued. “LA is on the right track and needs to stay the course. Vote no on Republican Spencer Pratt.” Supporters of smaller government and stronger public safety see those lines as the real issues, not a liability.
Public records tie the ad to an independent expenditure committee called LA Unions Opposed to Spencer Pratt for Mayor 2026, and filings say the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO sponsors the effort. The committee reported spending $221,000 on digital ads, a significant buy for a single-message campaign aimed at convincing Angelenos the city should not go in Pratt’s direction.
Because independent committees are barred from coordinating with campaigns under city rules, this is classic outside spending meant to influence voters without direct candidate involvement. That structure gives unions and interest groups cover to press their case while the candidate can distance himself from the message and sharpen his own responses to problems people feel every day.
Reaction on social media was immediate and not uniformly negative for Pratt. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, shared the clip on X and wrote, “This attack ad could well elect Pratt.” The senator’s point tapped into a broader conservative view that blunt, reality-based critiques of city leadership will play with voters fed up with rising crime and visible homelessness.
Other X users had fun with the commercial, mocking the ad’s tone and suggesting it served as free promotion. “This is supposed to be an attack ad??? Lolol.” one user wrote, while another said, “Wow even @UnrigLA is running ads supporting Spencer Pratt. This is such an incredible ad supporting Spencer Pratt!!!” Those reactions underline the risk for groups spending big: their message can be reframed as validation for the candidate.
Pratt’s campaign has leaned into the same themes the ad attacks him on, turning bluntness into a selling point. He has pushed homelessness, public safety and fiscal restraint as core issues, casting himself as an outsider who will break with the same elite approaches that many Angelenos blame for the city’s problems.
The timing follows a debate where Pratt drew attention for direct takedowns of current leadership and policy choices, and his profile has risen among voters who want tough talk and clear action. Whether that translates into votes will depend on whether Angelenos prefer loud promises or steady incremental management, but for now the conversation is centered on tangible failures and practical fixes.
Outside groups will keep spending to shape that choice, and campaigns will keep pushing counterarguments. The ad fight underscores a basic dynamic in modern municipal politics: when unions and big-money committees move, the candidate they aim to sink can sometimes benefit from the spotlight and solidify an outsider brand that many voters find compelling.
