Clown City

I don’t always listen to debates. Politics has gotten so out of hand that it seems that people are entering a boxing ring with gloves on. And there is name-calling. People do not know how to articulate or practice emotional control.

Which brings me to another topic: a man I knew, when angered, would blow up as if he were a child arguing with his five siblings. I closed that door and am glad I did to regain my inner peace. The reason I bring this up is that while emotional immaturity isn’t acceptable for a middle-aged man, it isn’t for politicians either. In fact, I hold them to a higher standard. But it seems that everyone believes stomping their feet, swearing, and calling the other person wrong serves a purpose.

Now back to the debate. It was the Los Angeles Mayor’s showdown, yesterday on KPCC. The current incumbent Karen Bass has been sharply criticized for not solving the homeless problem and being slow on the take with last year’s fires.

Every politician will be criticized, but Bass handles it with finesse. She’s running against Councilwoman Nithya Raman, who sounds like a cheerleader and points fingers as her platform because she has no plan and talks hot air. And there’s Spencer Pratt, a reality TV actor who has no business in the race. He’s trying to stand on the fact that he used to live in the Palisades. Who cares?

I believe Bass is well-positioned to be re-elected. I think she’s sharp and learns from her mistakes. Her answers remind me of Kamala, someone who does their homework, knows government, and knows where they stand on the issues, even if it goes against the grain. And last night's broadcast gave her the opportunity to debate the city’s difficulties.

The state of the electorate is represented by Pratt, who lost his Pacific Palisades home in last year’s fires. Yes, he fell well short of a result that would make him a threat to Bass. But he has received 30% of the votes. That’s as close as he’s going to get with his playing the sympathy card.

Raman’s 23% of the counted votes came from residents presumably unhappy with some aspect of Bass’s record, but they overwhelmingly came from residents on the mayor’s political left. They may see Bass as having done too little to address affordability or having spent too much on policing, (she has brought down the crime rate) but they are not going to fold into Pratt’s camp.

Pratt was deliberately insulting to Raman, as well as ideologically her opposite — his fulminations about homeless people are pretty much as far from Raman’s view as is imaginable.

So Bass advances with a much stronger position than she had four years ago when she beat businessman Rick Caruso.

Pratt, by contrast, is labeled as a not-very-bright Republican who is Donald Trump’s choice for the job. But how can anyone vote for a guy who knows nothing about how city government works and whose resume includes a business selling crystals and blowing cash on handbags and ammunition.

If Pratt makes headway, it says something — or should say something — to leaders of Los Angeles that roughly a third of the city’s voters are so unhappy with life as it is that they are willing to back an absurd candidate to run the city, kind of like what the country did in 2016 and in 2024. Voters asleep, not understanding consequences and not respecting the right to vote, their vote.

Angelinos don’t agree on the particulars — some are upset over homelessness, others over the high cost of living or the pace of rebuilding after the fires — but it’s safe to say that many are flatly unhappy with Bass’s performance and with the state of the city more generally. But that’s no excuse to bring a circus to town and elect another clown.