Spencer Pratt Bombshell Huge Update After Ballots Drop Overnight in LA Mayor Race
Los Angeles, California - June 11, 2026
Initial Republican Leads in California Primary Face Shifts as Late Ballots Continue to Be Processed
Following Tuesday’s primary elections, early vote tallies in key California races showed strong performances by Republican candidates. However, the state’s extended ballot-counting process has produced changes in preliminary results, raising questions about the pace and transparency of election administration.
In the Los Angeles mayoral race, right-leaning candidate Spencer Pratt held the top position after initial counts. The high-profile campaign had drawn considerable media attention and positioned Pratt as a notable contender.
In the gubernatorial primary, former television host Steve Hilton maintained a lead with approximately 28 percent of the vote. Former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra followed at roughly 25 percent, while progressive billionaire Tom Steyer stood at about 20 percent, according to figures representing roughly 60 percent of the total vote as of Wednesday morning.
Extended Timeline for Ballot Counting
California’s election system is characterized by a prolonged counting period that often stretches several days or longer after polls close. This timeline stems largely from the volume of mail-in ballots, provisional ballots, and the detailed verification processes required before final tabulation.
Ballots postmarked by Election Day continue to arrive and be processed in the days following the vote. Observers have noted instances where additional batches of ballots, sometimes described as late mail-in drops, have altered early leads in certain contests.
In the Los Angeles mayoral race, the initial advantage held by Spencer Pratt has been subject to movement as overnight and subsequent ballot processing continues. Similar dynamics have appeared in other races, with some preliminary results showing shifts toward Democratic candidates.
Election officials attribute the extended timeline to the need for thorough signature verification, curing of ballots, and the high number of mail ballots typical in the state. They maintain that these steps are essential to ensure accuracy and compliance with state law.
Political Reactions and Broader Debate
The early leads by Pratt and Hilton generated optimism among some observers that California might be experiencing a shift in voter sentiment. The subsequent processing of late ballots and resulting changes in standings have prompted criticism from those who argue the system lacks sufficient speed and transparency.
Critics contend that the structure of ballot acceptance and counting creates opportunities for disproportionate influence on final outcomes. They point to patterns in which late-arriving ballots have historically produced swings favoring one side in past elections.
Supporters of the current process emphasize that all legally cast ballots must be counted and that delays are an unavoidable byproduct of safeguards designed to protect election integrity. They reject claims of systemic irregularities and stress that the system has withstood previous scrutiny.
The situation has intensified calls from some quarters for reforms aimed at accelerating results while preserving verification standards. As additional ballots are processed in the coming days, further adjustments to the standings in both the Los Angeles mayoral race and the gubernatorial primary remain possible.
The ongoing count continues to highlight long-standing debates over election administration in California, with participants on multiple sides offering differing assessments of the process’s strengths and vulnerabilities.
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
