The comedian and actor Hannah Einbinder used a high-profile red carpet moment to voice strong objections to Spencer Pratt running for Los Angeles mayor. Speaking with a reporter at the Critics Choice Association’s Celebration of LGBTQ+ Cinema & Television, Einbinder framed her remarks around the influence of money in politics and what she sees as the mismatch between some wealthy donors’ professed values and their voting behavior.
Einbinder’s comments came shortly after the emotional conclusion of the television series Hacks, where she drew attention both for her work and her political advocacy. Her critique was not solely aimed at Pratt, but at a wider pattern: public figures with financial backing who may present themselves as progressive while ultimately aligning with candidates endorsed by conservative leaders.
Why Einbinder singled out Spencer Pratt
Einbinder explained that her opposition to Pratt is connected to the perception of where loyalties lie. She argued that some affluent Angelenos ‘masquerade’ as Democrats, yet their primary concerns are economic and often track toward candidates supported by right-leaning influencers — she specifically called out Pratt’s endorsement from Donald Trump as a significant factor. In her view, endorsements and financial alliances signal priorities that matter when voters evaluate candidates for mayor.
Money, endorsements, and voter behavior
The central point Einbinder raised was the role of economic influence in shaping political choices. She suggested that when wealth is the dominant concern for certain voters, that can lead to surprising alliances in a municipal race. That reasoning underpinned her public call for resistance to Pratt’s candidacy: a plea to scrutinize not just the personalities on the ballot but the interests backing them. Einbinder framed this as part of a larger civic responsibility rather than a celebrity scold.
Her choice and the pragmatic calculus
Rather than staying neutral, Einbinder said she made a pragmatic decision in the L.A. race: she is supporting Nithya Raman over Rae Huang. She acknowledged that no candidate is flawless — “no one is perfect,” she noted — but emphasized the need to pick a candidate whose priorities align more closely with community-focused governance. Her endorsement of Raman reflected a calculation about who best represents her values in city leadership.
Endorsements, expectations, and imperfect choices
Einbinder described her endorsement as a deliberate compromise. She admitted being underwhelmed in some respects by available options, yet concluded that casting a ballot for Raman was the responsible move in this particular contest. The tone she adopted combined realism and activism: a recognition of complexity along with a willingness to make a strategic choice.
Comments, culture, and celebrity perspectives
The conversation that day included a playful exchange with the reporter, who suggested Einbinder should run for office herself. She dismissed the idea emphatically, saying neither she nor Pratt should seek that path. She also chimed in on a remark attributed to Lisa Rinna, aligning with Rinna’s sentiment that the city should not repeat a pattern of electing reality TV stars to high office — a theme that has repeatedly surfaced in national conversation about celebrity candidates.
Beyond the mayoral race: the council matters
Einbinder stressed that attention must extend beyond the mayor’s race. She reminded listeners that while the mayor proposes the budget, the city council ultimately votes to approve it. That procedural point became the basis for urging voters to focus on local council contests, where decisions translate into day-to-day outcomes for Angelenos. In her view, council races are both strategic and substantive: they determine how priorities are enacted after a mayor proposes policies.
Advocacy and broader political stances
Einbinder has not shied away from weighing in on other contentious topics; she has publicly voiced support for Palestine and criticized the growing role of artificial intelligence in creative industries. Her comments at the Critics Choice celebration fit that pattern: a mix of cultural commentary and political advocacy, using visibility at an entertainment event to highlight civic issues. For her, celebrity visibility and political engagement are tools to encourage voters to look beyond surface appeal and consider who will defend community interests.
Overall, Einbinder’s statements combined critique, strategic endorsement, and a reminder that local offices like the city council exert real power. She urged resistance to candidates she sees as emblematic of misplaced priorities and encouraged voters to pay attention to the often-overlooked races that shape municipal governance.
