When reality television personality Spencer Pratt recently generated attention around a political run for Los Angeles Mayor, reactions ranged from amusement to genuine curiosity. For some observers, the idea seemed absurd, given his lack of political experience and history in reality television. For others, it felt entirely unsurprising and he gained quite a bit of momentum and support in a short amount of time. In fact, celebrities and well-known names such as Adam Corolla, James Woods, Jeanie Buss, and Nick Viall quickly announced their support of Pratt.

But the contrast between absurdity and devout support may reveal something important about the current political and cultural moment. The rise of political outsiders is no longer an anomaly. Candidates with limited governing experience, unconventional backgrounds, and strong personal brands continue to gain traction with voters across the political spectrum. While critics often focus on the qualifications—or lack thereof—of individual candidates, a more interesting question may be why so many voters are increasingly willing to consider them in the first place. The answer may have less to do with politics and more to do with trust.

The Collapse Of Institutional Confidence

For decades, institutions served as signals of credibility. Political experience, educational credentials, squeaky clean reputations, responsible decision making, and professional expertise mattered. Today, many of those traditional markers appear less persuasive than they once were. Public trust in government, media, higher education, and other major institutions has declined significantly over time.

As confidence in institutions weakens, people often begin looking elsewhere for leadership, information, and guidance. The result is a cultural shift in which traditional expertise competes directly with personal authenticity, or what some might perceive as such. People may not know whether a candidate understands public policy. They may, however, feel as though they know the candidate personal, and in an era of widespread skepticism, that familiarity can be powerful.

The Rise Of The Personal Brand Candidate

Social media has fundamentally altered the relationship between public figures and audiences. Historically, voters encountered political candidates through speeches, debates, interviews, and news coverage. Today, many people interact with public figures through podcasts, Instagram stories, TikTok videos, and other highly personal forms of communication.

These platforms create a sense of intimacy. Audiences feel as though they know the individual behind the public image. This phenomenon, often referred to as a parasocial relationship, can create strong emotional bonds between audiences and public figures—even when those figures have no direct relationship with their followers. As a result, visibility itself increasingly functions as a form of credibility.

The Authenticity Advantage

One reason outsiders often resonate with voters is that they are perceived as more authentic than traditional politicians. Whether that perception is accurate is almost beside the point. What matters is that many voters believe established political figures are scripted, rehearsed, and disconnected from everyday concerns. Outsiders often benefit from appearing unscripted, relatable, and willing to challenge existing systems.

In times of uncertainty, authenticity can become more persuasive than expertise. For example, a significant portion of Pratt’s platform has been about him losing his home in the Pacific Palisades wildfire that ravaged various parts of the Palisades community in Southern California in January 2025, and he says he and his family have been living in an Airstream. Despite newly revealed information that Pratt and his family have, in reality, been staying at the Bel-Air Hotel, where rooms range from $1,000 to $12,000 per night, many who share similar experiences may feel a distinct connection that they do not share with the other two Los Angeles mayoral candidates. In fact, psychological research suggests that people frequently evaluate leaders not only on competence but also on trustworthiness and relatability. When institutional trust is low, those qualities may become even more important, despite how deserving the candidate is of that trust.

A Reflection Of Broader Cultural Trends

The growing appeal of political outsiders is not occurring in isolation. Across industries, traditional gatekeepers have lost influence. Journalists compete with content creators. Universities compete with influencers. Medical experts compete with wellness personalities, and political leaders compete with podcast hosts.

The common thread is a broader skepticism toward institutions and a growing preference for individuals who appear independent of them. Whether that shift ultimately strengthens or weakens democratic systems remains an open question. It is easy to dismiss outsider candidates as evidence that politics has become entertainment. It very may have, but a more useful interpretation may be that their popularity reflects public frustration with existing systems.

People are not necessarily voting against expertise. They may be voting against institutions they no longer trust, and that distinction matters. If the rise of outsider candidates is ultimately a symptom of institutional distrust, then focusing solely on the candidates themselves misses the larger story. The real question is not why outsiders keep emerging, but why so many people believe outsiders are their best alternative.