Celebrities react to Spencer Pratt’s loss in the LA mayor’s race with hot takes on social media ⁠58%

By Katie Jerkovich⁠0%

6/12/2026, 11:19:27 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, and Recency Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 45.5% saturation with 208 hits. Analysis detected 1,022 faulty-reasoning hits from 457 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠58% (9,224 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 57.90% of the article peer group.

Hollywood stars are weighing in after Spencer Pratt’s bid to become Los Angeles mayor came to an end, after the candidate failed to secure enough votes to advance to a runoff against incumbent Mayor Karen Bass. 
Councilwoman Nithya Raman surged ahead in the June primary, setting up a November showdown with Bass while knocking the former “The Hills” star out of the race. 
Late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel, who <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/06/10/us-news/spencer-pratt-drops-defiant-video-promising-evidence-after-los-angeles-mayoral-loss/">has repeatedly slammed Pratt</a>, celebrated the news. 
“He clearly promised that if Karen Bass or Nithya Raman were elected mayor, he’s going to move out of L.A.,” Kimmel said on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” 
“Spencer, if you’re watching, we are so, so sorry to see you go.” 
“Moving is expensive, so, to help you out, we rented you a U-Haul. 
It has plenty of room. 
It’s got two beds, tables, chairs, all your crystals, whatever you want. 
Our staff spent the whole day decorating for you.” 
Former co-host of “The View” and longtime political commentator Meghan McCain blasted Kimmel for his attack on Pratt, reposting the late-night host&#8217;s &#8220;heartless&#8221; jab. 
“Jimmy Kimmel is a mean, heartless b*****d and no amount of on air crying will convince me or anyone else otherwise,” McCain <a href="https://x.com/MeghanMcCain/status/2064788141576274050? 
s=20">wrote on X</a>. 
“If nothing else —&nbsp; you changed the game. 
Well done.” 
Other stars like <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/05/27/us-news/dennis-quaid-backs-spencer-pratt-for-los-angeles-mayor/">actor Dennis Quaid</a> and fellow “The Hills” co-star Brody Jenner, who publicly supported Pratt&#8217;s run have yet to react on social media to the loss. 
Actor Wilson Cruz had a similar reaction to Kimmel, writing,&nbsp; “Are you still here? 
Let me help.” 
The sarcastic comment included a screenshot of flights out of LA. 
“Vanderpump Rules” star Katie Maloney laughed at those who thought Pratt had been robbed. 
“Please stop with this. 
It’s so tired,” Maloney <a href="https://www.threads.com/@musickillskate/post/DZdllHfCQws? 
xmt=AQG0alysT3qyms8ie-VkW_tZfxe7wKQwM3A-26N-BbzN1K74fV4tI0OncdVuW7rHiH02DWYh&amp;slof=1">wrote on Threads</a>. 
Pratt commented on social media on Thursday about the ridiculously slow counting of votes in the second biggest city in the county. 
“Are they done counting yet?” 
he wrote. 
## Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters 
**California Post News**: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/TheCaliforniaPost/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://www.instagram.com/californiapost" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Instagram</a>, <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@CaliforniaPost" target="_blank" rel="noopener">TikTok</a>, <a href="https://x.com/californiapost" target="_blank" rel="noopener">X</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/@thecaliforniapost" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>, <a href="https://www.whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb6a2IV1NCrL6q2AWq0E" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WhatsApp</a>, <a href="http://linkedin.com/company/californiapost" target="_blank" rel="noopener">LinkedIn</a><br>**California Post Sports** <a href="https://www.facebook.com/capostsports/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://www.instagram.com/capostsports/? 
hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Instagram</a>, <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@capostsports" target="_blank" rel="noopener">TikTok</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/@CaliforniaPostSports" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>, <a href="https://x.com/capostsports" target="_blank" rel="noopener">X</a><br>**California Post **<a href="https://x.com/californiapost" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Opinion</a> <br>**California Post Newsletters**: <a href="https://email.nypost.com/#california-post" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sign up here! 
</a><br>**California Post App**: <a href="https://apps.apple.com/us/app/california-post/id6751343487" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Download here! 
</a><br>**Home delivery**: <a href="https://subscribe.californiapost.com/defaultCAP">Sign up here! 
</a><a href="https://apps.apple.com/us/app/california-post/id6751343487" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><br></a>**Page Six Hollywood**: <a href="https://pagesix.com/hollywood-signup/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sign up here! 
</a> 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.3%Katie Jerkovich: 2.7%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias12.3%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 1.5%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 5.9%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 1.2%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 1.1%California Post: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.5%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.6%Katie Jerkovich: 13.8%California Post: 10.3%Framing Effect6.6%This article: 2.8%Katie Jerkovich: 1.2%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion2.8%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 1.0%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Katie Jerkovich: 1.2%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias1.1%This article: 45.5%Katie Jerkovich: 14.4%California Post: 16.0%Negativity Bias45.5%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 4.1%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Katie Jerkovich: 0.9%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error3.3%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.3%Katie Jerkovich: 1.2%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias6.3%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.7%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 3.7%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.5%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 19.0%Katie Jerkovich: 1.8%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias19.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.1%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 5.3%Katie Jerkovich: 2.4%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem5.3%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.3%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.7%Katie Jerkovich: 2.2%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority5.7%This article: 6.3%Katie Jerkovich: 1.6%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma6.3%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.7%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.1%Katie Jerkovich: 5.6%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization3.1%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.4%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 1.4%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 3.5%Katie Jerkovich: 11.2%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion3.5%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.7%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 4.1%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.7%Katie Jerkovich: 0.9%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof5.7%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.4%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 15.5%Katie Jerkovich: 7.9%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal15.5%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 5.7%Katie Jerkovich: 2.1%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.7%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.1%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 5.3%Katie Jerkovich: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading5.3%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.7%Katie Jerkovich: 5.7%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote5.7%This article: 2.8%Katie Jerkovich: 2.5%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection2.8%This article: 38.3%Katie Jerkovich: 10.1%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice38.3%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 1.2%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 0.0%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie Jerkovich: 2.9%California Post: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 23.9%Katie Jerkovich: 3.5%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…23.9%

457 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers28%attributed speech327writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageJimmy Kimmel • 26 words • 100.0% coverageJimmy Kimmel • 13 words • 100.0% coverageJimmy Kimmel • 13 words • 100.0% coverageJimmy Kimmel • 5 words • 0.0% coverageJimmy Kimmel • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJimmy Kimmel • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageMeghan McCain • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageMeghan McCain • 8 words • 0.0% coverageMeghan McCain • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWilson Cruz • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageKatie Maloney • 4 words • 0.0% coverageKatie Maloney • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageSpencer Pratt • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Meghan McCain

71%flagged-word coverage
34 attributed words26% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%37.5%75.0%Biased Writer Voice+34.2 ptsWriter: 36.4%Meghan McCain: 70.6%70.6%Attempt to Sell a Product -33.3 ptsWriter: 33.3%Meghan McCain: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.