Karen Bass says L.A.’s political establishment doesn’t like Raman. Well, boo-hoo
-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
With three weeks left to go until election day and polls showing her on the brink of losing, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has begun to channel the Sun King himself, Louis XIV:
L’État, c’est moi.
Gaslighting voters by insisting the political establishment that has left Los Angeles a mess and that she personifies is worth keeping in office for four more years is her only hope for victory. It’s a wild strategy that reached a crescendo during Tuesday night’s debate, as Bass kept bringing up the fact that L.A.’s ancien régime just doesn’t like her democratic socialist opponent, Nithya Raman.
“Your colleagues have a very difficult time working with you,” Bass snapped at one point, later claiming that Raman’s constituents don’t care for her even though the council member won reelection two years ago. The mayor twice bragged that immigrant rights groups support her; twice referenced Imelda Padilla, the moderate San Fernando Valley council member whose internet dragging of Raman has been out of the Burn Book from “Mean Girls”; and described her opponent as “not ready for prime time.”
Well, the way the mayor’s term has gone in the last couple of years, if it was a prime-time TV show, it might be called “Breaking Bad 2.” And it wouldn’t exactly be a hit.
If it were, two-thirds of Angelenos wouldn’t have decided to vote for anyone but Bass in the primary.
Bass portrayed Raman as someone who isn’t ready to lead the city, while Raman described the mayor as being ‘missing in action’ during fires in Pacific Palisades and Boyle Heights.
Bass arguably won the debate Tuesday night, but it felt like the technical “victory” — and that’s probably the wrong word — of a politician who is simply more polished. The mayor really needed a knockout punch, and that she did not achieve.
Instead, she in effect told voters that the last four years of disasters, inefficiencies and ineptitude are still a better option than taking a chance on the City Hall equivalent of the classroom dork.
Yet people are so angry at Bass and what she represents that a democratic socialist has a great shot at becoming L.A.’s next mayor — an unthinkable prospect even last year, with no one to blame but the ruling class that has left this great city hobbled, cynical and at the point of giving up.
So the establishment doesn’t like Raman: So what? And: Boo-hoo.
Casting Raman as a political leper while asserting that Bass represents stability and good times ahead isn’t the winning strategy that Bass and Raman’s critics think it is. It’s really just a sad coda for Bass.
She’s been a good soldier for L.A., someone who has participated in nearly every progressive movement to pass through Southern California since volunteering for Robert F. Kennedy’s presidential campaign as a teenager nearly 60 years ago. Even as Bass embarked on a 22-year political career that has seen stops in Sacramento, Washington and City Hall, the native Angeleno always successfully depicted herself as a political outsider.
Because she was: a Black woman in a realm not meant for people like her. She was someone who co-founded a pioneering nonprofit in the crucible of a changing South L.A. in the 1990s and always seemed to land on the right side of history until becoming mayor in 2022.
Sadly, Bass didn’t turn out to be the visionary L.A. desperately needed.
Like so many baby boomers, Bass eventually became The Man without realizing it. Today, she not only stands as the figurehead of the city’s liberal potentates, but she’s also calling on them to rally around one of their own — and they have responded in kind. Democratic politicians, bureaucrats and labor leaders, once rabble-rousers like Bass who nowadays seem to exist mostly to keep their sinecure, have labored mightily to convince unbelieving voters that Bass deserves another shot.
That’s always been the marvel of L.A.’s political establishment. It can take someone like Bass, once considered so radical that her days visiting communist Cuba in the 1970s torpedoed her chances of becoming then-presidential candidate Joe Biden’s running mate in 2020, and transform her into an anodyne incumbent. It can make democratic socialists like Councilmembers Eunisses Hernandez, Ysabel Jurado and Hugo Soto-Martínez — people who explicitly ran to take on a sclerotic City Hall — full-throated Bass supporters who have refused to support one of their own in Raman.
Raman was also becoming part of L.A.’s political chosen ones, to the point she initially endorsed Bass. But she now embraces her turn as the machine’s biggest sellout — whether it’s a true change of heart or a chameleonic self-serving measure, as critics maintain, remains to be seen. It was Raman who said at the end of the debate, “When the mayor is confronted with issues, she blames the system. With your support, we can actually change the system” — catnip to enough Angelenos that Raman seems to be at the cusp of victory and a monumental upset.
After the debate, NBC reporter Robert Kovacic interviewed elected officials to let them hype up Bass or Raman. The latter’s proxy was City Controller Kenneth Mejia, another person loathed by L.A.’s political know-it-alls because he keeps bucking the establishment. Mejia gushed about how Raman “destroyed” Bass with the enthusiasm of a Swiftie.
Times columnists weigh in on the final mayoral debate before the Nov. 3 election.
Bass’ supporters were Councilmember Monica Rodriguez and Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, both of whom gravely parroted their candidate’s warnings about just how dangerous a Raman mayoralty would be. Chavez Zbur reduced Raman’s not-bad performance to a “host of complaints” — ironic, because most of Bass’ night was spent bashing Raman instead of offering much of anything positive.
Rodriguez, meanwhile, told Kovacic that voters shouldn’t choose Raman because “we can’t afford that level of indecisive leadership.”
I rolled my eyes when Rodriguez — whose office declined a chance for her to sit down with me to talk up why Latinos should support Bass — said that.
She’s part of the fabled eastern San Fernando Valley Latino political machine, another group of former gatecrashers who assumed the trappings and stylings of the old guard once they assumed power. Rodriguez long blasted Bass with the same venom she reserved for Raman until the latter mounted her challenge — but now that Rodriguez’s power is under threat, she’s all of a sudden decided to become Bass’ ride-or-die?
Moves like that remind me of another French monarch, Louis XV. “After me, the deluge,” he is supposed to have said, a warning of what would happen once his reign ended.
If Bass’ vow to rule the same as before represents a decisive leader, more and more Angelenos seem to be saying, give us the Raman flood.
Besides, nobody ever said, nor ever put on a campaign sticker, “The establishment? It’s cool!”
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- The column argues that Karen Bass’s attacks on Nithya Raman’s relationships with City Hall colleagues and her readiness to lead amount to a defense of the political establishment, not a persuasive case for another term. It portrays voter frustration with Bass’s record as the opening that has made Raman’s challenge viable.
- It contends that Bass once represented an outsider challenging entrenched power but has become a symbol of the same establishment she formerly opposed. The piece also questions whether Raman’s break with that political circle reflects a genuine change of course, noting that she had previously endorsed Bass.
- The column acknowledges that Bass appeared more polished in the debate, but argues that her focus on criticizing Raman did little to answer voters’ concerns about city government. Raman’s call to change the system, it suggests, resonated because many Angelenos are dissatisfied with the status quo.
Different views on the topic
- Bass has argued that Raman is not ready to lead, citing strained relationships with council colleagues and what Bass describes as shifts in Raman’s positions. In the debate, Bass also questioned Raman’s judgment on public safety and her ability to work with others at City Hall.[1][2]
- Critics of Raman point to specific policy reversals: she opposed a request to add 170 police officers, then later said the city should maintain LAPD staffing. Raman has responded that Bass sought more officers without a long-term plan to pay for them.[1]
- Bass’s defenders cite her administration’s homelessness work, including the Inside Safe program, which the mayor says has helped reduce homelessness. Raman counters that the program is costly and insufficiently accountable, and favors expanding rental vouchers instead.[3][4][5]
- Bass has also argued that Raman’s approach could destabilize the city and raise concerns about public safety ahead of the 2028 Olympics. Raman’s contrasting case is that Bass has failed to deliver effective management, respond adequately to crises and address declining city services.[3]
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
William Mulholland was the water boss who made L.A. possible. His reputation gave him unchecked authority as a dam builder. In 1928, that led to one of America’s deadliest disasters--and the question of whether it was a crime.
It started as a ploy to scare Texas out of redrawing its congressional map and ended with California voters approving a new map of their own, one that could hat could help alter the balance of power in Washington.
On this week’s episode of Boiling Point, Miranda Green speaks with Los Angeles Times climate reporter Hayley Smith about how AI bots are meddling in California’s clean energy policymaking.
