.jpg){kind=link}
In the June primary, 292,592 people voted for Karen Bass and 247,781 voted for Nithya Raman. Another 313,520 voted for one of the twelve candidates who did not make the runoff, which is 36.72 percent of everyone who cast a mayoral ballot. Spencer Pratt accounts for 217,977 of them.
Those 313,520 votes are the largest single bloc in the race, larger than either finalist's own total, and on November 3 all of them are unassigned. This is what we can say about where it is and what the census says about the places it came from.
It is the 2022 map
The clearest way to locate the Pratt vote is to compare it to the last citywide race the city ran. In the November 2022 general, Rick Caruso took 45.17 percent against Bass. Across the fifteen council districts, Caruso's 2022 share and Pratt's 2026 share correlate at r = +0.926.
That is close to the same geography twice. The two candidates share no party structure, no consultant class and no obvious platform overlap, and one of them spent more than $100 million while the other raised a median gift of $241. The places that were most receptive to each were nearly the same places.
| Council district | Caruso, Nov 2022 | Pratt, Jun 2026 | Bass, Jun 2026 | Raman, Jun 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | 60.36% | 39.11% | 31.72% | 19.03% |
| 7 | 58.18% | 31.86% | 35.26% | 20.65% |
| 3 | 57.23% | 36.81% | 31.55% | 20.92% |
| 15 | 54.72% | 31.36% | 39.16% | 18.16% |
| 6 | 51.47% | 25.47% | 35.19% | 25.32% |
| 11 | 46.92% | 29.46% | 32.22% | 27.88% |
| 5 | 45.24% | 30.69% | 28.93% | 30.67% |
| 4 | 41.95% | 26.56% | 31.28% | 33.60% |
| 2 | 41.68% | 24.47% | 30.98% | 33.56% |
| 9 | 39.90% | 15.01% | 42.24% | 25.00% |
| 14 | 38.78% | 17.05% | 32.67% | 37.54% |
| 1 | 38.30% | 15.12% | 29.53% | 39.50% |
| 13 | 33.81% | 15.94% | 26.90% | 45.49% |
| 10 | 29.90% | 12.70% | 44.49% | 31.28% |
| 8 | 27.05% | 10.72% | 61.80% | 18.38% |
Pratt ranges from 39.11 percent in Council District 12 to 10.72 percent in Council District 8, a spread of nearly four to one. Four of his five strongest districts sit in the San Fernando Valley.
The same comparison run against the two finalists goes the other way. Caruso's 2022 share correlates at -0.429 with Bass's 2026 share and at -0.539 with Raman's. Of the two candidates still running, Raman's map is the one furthest from the map of the bloc in play.
What the census says about those places
We joined the June precinct returns to American Community Survey figures apportioned from census blocks, then compared Pratt's precinct-level share against each variable across 738 precincts.
| Variable | Correlation with Pratt's precinct share |
|---|---|
| Non-Hispanic white share | +0.552 |
| Median household income | +0.543 |
| Median age | +0.434 |
| Bachelor's degree share | +0.305 |
| Hispanic share | -0.362 |
| Black share | -0.406 |
| Renter share | -0.523 |
The largest correlations are with non-Hispanic white share, income and renter share, with age behind them. Pratt's strongest precincts tended to have higher incomes, older residents and fewer renters than the city as a whole.
Comparing the extremes makes the same point in plainer units. The 73 precincts where Pratt ran strongest cast 112,008 mayoral votes between them. Their median precinct is 60 percent non-Hispanic white, 30 percent renter, has a median household income of $136,440 and a median age of 44.4. Pratt's median share across them was 46.1 percent.
The 73 precincts where he ran weakest cast 59,096 votes. Their median precinct is 10 percent non-Hispanic white and 30 percent Hispanic, 70 percent renter, with a median household income of $72,944 and a median age of 38.2. Pratt's median share across them was 8.4 percent.
The strongest decile cast nearly twice as many mayoral votes as the weakest, which reflects how many people there voted rather than how many live there.
Where the two finalists' precincts differ
Run the same correlations for the two candidates who are still running. These are precinct-level relationships throughout, and the limits section below explains what they can and cannot support.
Bass's strongest relationship in the June returns is with Black population share, at +0.699, comfortably her largest and larger than any single correlation in Pratt's column. Raman's strongest is with renter share, at +0.438. Pratt's relationship with renter share is -0.523.
Renter share is the variable on which Pratt's precincts and Raman's diverge most: his correlation with it is negative and hers is the largest positive one in her column.
What these numbers cannot tell you
Two limits matter here, and both are substantial.
The first is that this is precinct data, not voter data. A correlation between a precinct's homeownership rate and its vote share tells you about places, not about people. Precincts with more homeowners voted more heavily for Pratt, and it does not follow that homeowners individually did. Concluding otherwise is the ecological fallacy, and it is the most common way this kind of analysis goes wrong. The individual voter file that would settle it is sold by Los Angeles County under Elections Code restrictions and we have not acquired it.
The second is geography. Precinct boundaries were redrawn between 2022 and 2026 and only 242 of the 739 June 2026 precincts appear in all five recent elections, so precinct-to-precinct comparison across those cycles is not reliable. That is why the Caruso comparison above is computed at council district level, where boundaries held. Fifteen units is a small n, and the correlation should be read as a description of a shared pattern rather than a precise coefficient.
A vote for a candidate in June is not a transferable asset in November. Some of these 313,520 people will not vote again. Turnout between a June primary and a November runoff does not hold constant, and in this city it never has.