This is an opinion from the Center.
Because most voters are continuously and justifiably dissatisfied with their elected representatives, smart candidates from both parties have long attempted to present themselves as “political outsiders.” It is the rare politician who will argue that all things should remain exactly as they are and that there is no room for improvement on anything. As Americans became even more disgusted and dismissive with a broken political system, those who position themselves as agents of change become more attractive to incessantly disappointed but relentlessly optimistic voters.
This has not always been the case. For much of the first three-quarters of our country’s existence, Americans tended to prefer candidates with relevant experience when determining their votes. In the decades after independence, our ancestors prioritized those leaders with significant military training and expertise. The US then went through a period where it tended to elect candidates with extensive backgrounds in diplomacy and international affairs. But for much of the 20th century, we rewarded those with political experience, confident that elected officials steeped in the workings of government and policy would be especially effective in their jobs.
In the aftermath of Watergate and Vietnam, when voters began to sour on politics and politicians, candidates who reminded them of what they disliked about the system became less attractive, and we turned instead to newer and fresher faces. The result was the rise of the self-styled outsiders, who promised change, reform, and a fresh start.
For a while, governors leveraged their geographic distance from Washington to present themselves as something new and different. Chief executives of Georgia, California, Arkansas, and Texas all ran for the White House successfully against the status quo. For 24 of the 28 years between 1981 and 2009, the Oval Office was occupied by a former governor.
But as Americans became even more unhappy with politics, the definition of a true outsider was forced to evolve to new levels of outsiderness. Barack Obama had served less than half a term in the US Senate when he announced his candidacy for president. Eight years later, Donald Trump became the first president in history to have never held any elected office or military position. That seemed as outside as an outsider could get.Until it wasn’t. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Marjorie Taylor Greene. The House Freedom Caucus. Zohran Mamdani. Graham Plattner. Andor. All have pushed that outsider envelope even further, galvanizing disaffected voters to join their crusades against… most things. (In the 1950s movie The Wild Ones, Marlon Brando’s character was asked, “What are you rebelling against?” Brando’s response: “Whaddya got?”)
And now Spencer Pratt, the former reality TV anti-hero who will not become mayor of Los Angeles but who has set a new and even more outside standard for how outside a political outsider can be. Pratt entered the mayoral campaign earlier this year, fueled by the understandable outrage of someone who had lost his home in last year’s devastating wildfires, and equally understandably furious at what he and many others saw as an underwhelming response from the current mayor.
Pratt was quickly dismissed as a gadfly, but fueled by an aggressive and creative social media presence, he penetrated the collective consciousness of angry Angelenos to an unprecedented degree. Voters in this city have long been frustrated with any number of intractable problems—housing and homelessness, traffic, affordability, and too many others to count. But the wildfires seemed to crystalize those dissatisfactions, and Pratt leveraged those various frustrations to become a surprisingly competitive candidate in the race. Even though he is unlikely to become mayor, he has demonstrated that an extraordinarily unconventional candidate with no regard for political norms is exceptionally well-positioned to tap into populist resentments against the status quo.
Pratt, who took my political communications class during his time at USC long before he or I had ever heard of social media, became an enthusiastic tribune for the voters’ willingness to rage against the local political machine. If he were not a registered Republican running in a deep-blue city, he would have a real chance of victory. The fact that he is not—and therefore does not—won’t prevent numerous imitators from emerging in 2028 and carrying his message in more competitive environments.
Want to talk about this topic more? Read more of Dan’s writing at: www.danschnurpolitics.com.
.png.webp)
