Movies are political and it's good to discuss their politics, but if you view a film primarily as an ideology delivery system that is caked in stupid art and entertainment and pleasure that it uses to distract the dumb unwashed and make What It Is Really Saying palatable, you might be the problem.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Republican|North Carolina District 8
Mark Harris
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 517
Yes75%
No24%
Present0%
Not Voting0%
Party align92%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 8
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Mark Harris
U.S. RepresentativeRepublicanNorth Carolina District 8
SoupScore
Mark's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 14 sponsored · 69 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
"This movie failed politically because its politics were compromised by its plot and its characters" is why, I want to say this gently, some people should never be allowed to speak about culture publicly.
For me it was The Sting.
Also, at one point (spoiler), Michelle Pfeiffer announces that she is "selling the townhouse." Honey, you don't live in a townhouse. You live in a luxury high-rise. As we have been shown several times, the bathroom has a view of the whole city. Is your townhouse 47 stories high?
...which I brilliantly deduced because you can see its name! As well as a "Fifth Street" sign through the window! ("Fifth Street" exists in NYC, but barely.) Then we see a character walk out of the restaurant past a huge vertical "VALET PARKING" sign. That is not a thing in Manhattan. At least try!
Not to keep picking on The Madison (but oh, I'm going to): This show has one of the laziest doubling-for-NYC shots I've ever seen. Cut from skyline to a chic ladies-who-lunch Manhattan restaurant. Except that it's actually Wicked Butcher in Fort Worth, TX... >
I will happily take that blame!
That said, not watching or caring about the Oscars is fine. Do your thing! But if, in doing your thing, you dismiss them as corrupt, or a popularity contest, or meaningless (all demonstrably wrong), you may be misunderstanding the thing you're so intent on disparaging.
I love them too (shocker). No, they are not an "objective" measure of quality. But subjective, idiosyncratic measures are much more interesting! The Oscars capture a moment each year that lets us see how the industry wants its aspirations represented. If you care about film history, that has value.>
There is a moment in this show when we hear a man lament that because his daughters live in New York City, "they have never built a snowman." Like, what in God's name are you talking about?! Most of the anti-NYC stuff is just smug reactionary nonsense but some of it is just like, are you okay?
Okay, Michelle Pfeiffer won; I'm watching. It is so weird how Taylor Sheridan is simultaneously this Man Of the Land made of Carhartt and gasoline and saddle sweat and the scarediest old grandma from 1986 saying "New York?! Everybody has a switchblade and it's nothing but fancy food and snobs!"
Reposted byMark Harris
The thing about Zohran doing this is that he may not get immediate credit from Jewish organizations, but telling these psychos to fuck off and thus polarizing his own broad left-wing coalition against them is in and of itself beneficial.
![Tweet from Susan Abulhawa: "Israelis should not feel safe anywhere in the world. I also don't give a shit if people collapse the distinction between zionists from jews—not when 82% [at least] of Jewish Israelis and the same percentage of American Jews support this holocaust. And a high proportion of the ones who don't support it, do so because it's bad for Jews, not necessarily because they're literally exterminating the indigenous people of the land they stole.
Wipe that vile colony from this earth. The only way humanity has a fighting chance at a moral future if this cancer is excised from our political, moral, and social reality."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did%3Aplc%3Acmvc2f5b5fou3ijbgagiovlj/bafkreibyjc243nzuywlqohzkb4pzjz6ralv5sujiwbqp5dfjg74ezkfxeu@jpeg)
You think saying "Antisemitism is bad" is "unnecessarily provocative"? Yeah, kindly de-list, de-follow, and disappear.
My kind advice is that you already seem to understand that "leaders in Israel" and "Jews" are not synonyms, and as long as you keep saying what you mean, and as long as you remember that "Jewish" refers to a religion and not to any one set of political beliefs, you'll be fine!
Just gonna add a tip that if you and I have never interacted before or exchanged pleasant words here even once, and/or if you're one of those people who searches "antisemitism" looking for people to correct, our interaction is probably going to be nasty, brutish, and short. Watch a TV show instead!
When someone feels comfortable saying that all Jews should be exterminated, I think the slur perhaps HASN'T lost all meaning. But maybe we're different kind of leftists. Y'know, historically.
A number of people here seem to be road-testing the question "Just how overtly antisemitic can I get away with being on Bluesky?" right now. When you see it--especially in the name of leftism--name, shame, and block.
A catastrophically boorish sycophant who used his short tenure to destroy a great institution. Good riddance to Ric Grenell and may this mark the second-to-last time we ever hear his name. www.nytimes.com/live/2026/03...
To quote Naomi Wolf, "No! No!!"
LOL if he has spent 24 hours in NYC in the last ten years without a team catering to his every need, I would be shocked. What's to resent? Was he forced at gunpoint to go to an advertiser meet-and-greet or something?
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History517 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
517 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-05-06 | H. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-05 | H.R. 36 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2025-05-05 | H.R. 530 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-01 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-05-01 | H.J. Res. 78 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-30 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-30 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-29 | H.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-29 | H.R. 859 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-29 | H.R. 1442 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-29 | H.R. 1402 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-29 | H. Res. 354 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-29 | H. Res. 354 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-28 | S. 146 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-28 | H.R. 973 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2025-04-10 | H.R. 22 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-10 | H.R. 22 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-04-10 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Accept Senate changes | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-10 | H.R. 1228 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-10 | H.R. 1526 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-09 | H.R. 1526 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-04-09 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-09 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-09 | H. Res. 313 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-09 | H. Res. 313 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-08 | H. Res. 294 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-08 | H. Res. 294 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-07 | H.R. 1039 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-07 | H.R. 586 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-01 | H.R. 1491 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-04-01 | H. Res. 282 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-04-01 | H. Res. 282 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-31 | H.R. 997 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-31 | H.R. 517 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-27 | H.R. 1048 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-27 | H.R. 1048 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-03-27 | H.R. 1048 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-03-27 | H.R. 1048 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-03-27 | H.R. 1048 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-03-27 | H.J. Res. 75 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-27 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-25 | H. Res. 242 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-25 | H. Res. 242 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-25 | H.R. 1534 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2025-03-24 | H.R. 1326 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2025-03-24 | H.R. 359 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-11 | H.J. Res. 25 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-11 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-11 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-03-11 | H.R. 1156 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.