Julia Louis-Dreyfus Emmy

The Case for Why Julia Louis-Dreyfus Needs to Exit Next Year's Emmy Race

Veep star Julia Louis-Dreyfus scored her record-breaking fifth consecutive Emmy last night for her portrayal of unhinged politico Selina Meyer and make no mistake — she deserved it. In the HBO comedy’s fifth season, the Seinfeld vet revealed new layers of her hilariously narcissistic, acid-tongued alter ego. This was particularly the case in “Mother,” an episode that found Selina at her most relatable as she struggled to process the imminent death of her mom — a woman she loathed.

The fact that Louis-Dreyfus is still able to surprise us this deep into Veep‘s run is a testament to her acting prowess, and is the reason she remains an unbeatable Emmy force.

But enough is enough. It’s time for Louis-Dreyfus to withdraw her name from Emmy consideration, beginning with next year’s contest.

There’s precedent for such a selfless act: In 1996, shortly after winning her fifth non-consecutive Lead Actress Emmy for Murphy Brown, Candice Bergen took herself out of the running in order to give one of her peers a shot at the gold statue. And that was back when there were, like, a dozen comedies on the air. In this era of #PeakTV, a Louis-Dreyfus-less Lead Actress competition would not only allow one of her overdue rivals to grab gold, but it would create a much-needed vacancy in the six-person race, paving the way for the Michaela Watkins’ and Constance Wus and Rachel Blooms of the world to sneak in.

And, as a producer on Veep, she would still have the chance to add to her enviable kudos collection (which also includes Emmys for The New Adventures of Old Christine and Seinfeld) should the show maintain its red-hot creative streak. And we would still get to look forward to what has become one of Emmy’s most reliably entertaining traditions: The Julia Louis-Dreyfus acceptance speech.

What do you think? Should Louis-Dreyfus take a knee, effective immediately? Vote below, and then elaborate in the comments. 

Comments are monitored, so don’t go off topic, don’t frakkin’ curse and don’t bore us with how much your coworker’s sister-in-law makes per hour. Talk smart about TV!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Mark says:

    Didn’t John Larroquette take himself out of the running, after winning a bunch for playing Dan Fielding on Night Court?

    • jerzygirl45 says:

      Yes. Back in 1989, after his 4th consecutive win, he asked that his work not be submitted for Emmy consideration as Best Supporting Actor in a Comedy series

    • Simon Jester says:

      I came here to post the exact same thing: It was Larroquette not Candace Bergen, who set the precedent. Credit where credit is due.

      • Mike M says:

        “Credit where credit is due” is exactly the point here. If you are a great actor/actress and have a great year, why should your past success or failure EVER have to influence your right to be judged against your peers? The voters decide the victor after all, it’s not like a submission magically means you will win. Maybe constant name recognition does play a factor in voters minds, but hey let’s face facts here, there should be ZERO doubt that every single year JLD has won she was far and away the best actress in her category. In this politically correct age of kids getting “victory” ribbons and certificates for the magical achievement of “participation”, it’s just all kinds of wrong to suggest that any actor or actress is going to feel truly victorious with a gong when they (and everyone ever looking at their award) know that the real contest was never actually waged. Even MORE so now than in Larroquette’s day, when he was one actor in a far fewer group of shows, who maybe felt that there was not that much competition present, and justifying the constant wins was less easy. But today there is SO much competition out there in terms of shows that just even getting nominated is a real achievement, and to win from there even once all the more significant. So “standing down” is just the more ridiculous, as any win in this truly competitive world is only a real win with REAL meaning when it’s won against the best, and I guarantee you the actors and actresses out there might love the salary bump it may give them to win a “thin air” big name award, but it won’t make the first words in their head every day for months be “I f#$%ing did it!”.

    • rawley says:

      Pretty sure Jim Parsons did the same recently…

    • GUSTAVO ALCALA says:


  2. jj says:

    although if she did that it would create the situation of whoever wins would have “because JLD didn’t compete” hovering over her win.

    • mary says:

      Yeah I think it would sort of take the glory out of the other person’s win. I think this isn’t on her I think it is on the voters to be more original because JLD deserves all her Emmys but Traci Ellis Ross deserved to win last night to (she was the only one I thought was a real contender against JLD)

      • jc says:

        Totally agree with this thread, seem dismissive of the other comedic actresses to suggest they can’t win without her withdrawing, or to have it said that they won “only” because she didn’t compete. I think she is great in this role and still finding layers to the character that warrant the recognition of at least a nomination. Whether she deserves the win is up to the voters, who certainly could have cast their votes for any of the talented ladies in this category and have been justified. I don’t feel like JLD is past her prime in this show and just winning because she name recognition, like I’ve felt in the past especially about certain series who didn’t seem to have earned “best” every single season, in my opinion at least.

  3. Elissa says:

    Absolutely not. The only people voting ‘yes’ have to be people who have never seen Veep / are sour about their favourite shows losing. Game of Thrones has won a record number of Emmys, should they just stop submitting? As long as she is the funniest woman on TV, Julia deserves to continue submitting her work AND being acknowledged for it. Other ladies can step it up a notch if they want to win.

    • the girl says:

      I’ve seen Veep and I think she should take her name out of the running. JLD is bananas good and the show is reliably hilarious. But the truth is that enough is enough. There are plenty of other actresses who are deserving. I find myself wondering if she’s winning because it’s easier to vote for a friend/the person who has always won rather than really looking into the performances of the others in the category.

    • PatriciaLee says:

      The actress should get her just due, with good work deserving good feedback. However, viewers did not check in to the Emmys. That is a problem and has to be dealt with. Fallon got 5 billion hits on youtube, and that did not transfer over to the Emmys? I’d feel badly I forgot to watch because of Mr. Robot, being a fan, but they are only interested in the younger demo. They are just going to have to surrender and make the shows they want to win FREE! The husband and I never watch most of these shows, being cookie-cutter procedural types, but suits wake up and smell the changing times. You charge for shows and expect to gain a huge young demo? LOL at you!

    • molly says:

      couldn’t agree more. JLD rocks. The writing on VEEP is what counts too. Can’t be funny without great writing. Other shows need to bring it.

    • rawley says:

      Actually as Game of Thrones has become utter garbage, and that’s when they started winning Emmys, yes I wish they’d stop submitting.

  4. Christine says:

    I said the same thing when they announced how many times she had one, its kind of in poor taste she didn’t remove herself after 3 in a row.

  5. No. This is absurd. I can’t even believe you would ask this.

  6. GuessWhat says:

    Puh-lease. Do sports teams say bow out after winning multiple championships in a row? Of course not. May the best team — er, person — win!

    • skrable2 says:

      Sports teams don’t get voted championships.

      • Big Mike says:

        So, a reward earned via a vote isn’t as prestigious as one earned another way? I’ll let all those boxers and MMA fighters know that their victories via decision aren’t as good as their other victories.

        • dank16 says:

          Again…there is a specific criteria for judging in a mma or box match. It is also a one on one, head to head competition. It would be like holding 10 seperate fights in one night and then giving the Championship to whichever of the 5 winners the judges believed deserved the Championship the most, even though they did not fight each other.

          • Gern Blanston says:

            Isn’t that exactly what happens with diving or gymnastics in the Olympics?

          • dank16 says:

            Yes, but again, there are specific, standardized criteria for the judges to use in their scoring. If they are doing their job correctly (which isn’t always the case unfortunately…specifically in Olympic boxing) then they are scoring impartially based on the execution of the athlete and how close to perfect they perform based on a set standard. Any award given for an acting or musical performance is completely subjective and based on how the voter “feels” about the performance. And each and every voter could have a completely different criteria for judging the performances. Or, they could have none at all and just go with the person they think everyone else is going to vote for. There really is no way to know.

  7. andrew hass says:

    If Julai-Louis Dreyfuss wants to take her name out of Emmy consideration that should be her decision.Now if she does she could say she wants to do it on her terms and that she decided that 5 straight Emmys is a long enough streak for her.

  8. Sarah says:

    People get on my nerves. No one has been better than her in the last 5 years. Some came close but no one has surpassed her work on Veep. Life isn’t a charity case. It’s not her job to make life easier for others. Instead of whining, how about work harder. This sense of entitlement is typical of those who want things handed to them. Too bad. JLD shows up and shows out every season. She should not be punished or belittled for being a comedic genius who continues to deliver. Great writing with great comedic timing has propelled her in this category. Strive to reach her level instead of wishing she lowered herself to yours. I can’t stand this line of thinking. That we should punish successful people while praising who have obviously have not earned the right to such praise. No thanks. I hope she doesn’t become another person ashamed to be talented. Surpass her or STFU.

    • Big Mike says:

      Here here!

    • Lauren says:

      AMY POHELER THOUGH! Homegirl should have at least one for Parks & Rec. I agree with other comments that the voters get lazy.

      • Spence says:

        I don’t necessarily agree that “nobody” has surpassed her work on Veep in the last five years. As Lauren says, Amy Poehler should’ve won at LEAST one award for Parks, especially for the beautiful final season. Further, I think Ellie Kemper’s work on this season of Kimmy Schmidt was on par with the work of JLD in terms of depth brought to her character and comedic skill.

    • Nina Waren says:

      Exactly. I love what you said about life not being a charity case. If you want to be the best, you have to beat the best!

  9. T. says:

    I’m the Best so I am going to withdraw from the next Olympic Games in order to let someone else win the gold medal.

  10. jericho says:

    This just goes to show the single-mindedness of the academy. Sure we got a Maslany and a Malek win in the drama categories, but we never see that kind of forward thinking in the comedy section. Julia should have won one (maybe two) but the high water mark for both her and Veep has long since passed and its time for the academy to finally notice others.

    • Person says:

      It is still the best comedy on TV. You can be good for more than one or two seasons. Last season was one of the best of the series. Those ten weeks on HBO are hands down the best two hours of TV (GOT – VEEP – SV). What do you consider “forward” thinking? These new “comedies” that don’t have any jokes? Most of the comedies nominated are half-hour dramas and should be treated as such.

  11. Noooooo Michael! JLD is the best comedic actress of this generation and deserves even MORE trophies.

  12. mary says:

    I don’t think she should do it, JLD deserves all her wins. That isn’t saying others don’t as well (not Rachel Bloom or Schemer way overhyped) but JLD shouldn’t not compete when she is doing great work. The voters need to really pay attention and make sure they are watching and if JLD is the best she gets it if she wasn’t then give it to someone else. But even the article said JLD deserved it so there you go.

  13. skrable2 says:

    I think this is a solid suggestion and, as noted, others have done so.

    Perhaps JL-D should present the next Best Actress in a Comedy award — a kind of passing of the torch which give the Emmy audience a chance to recognize her once again

  14. Clark Kent says:

    This has to be one of the most ridiculous articles ever written. What has this country come to when people are calling for someone who wins too much to not even try?

    Enough with the everybody gets a trophy for participation nonsense. If Dreyfus deserves the Emmy, she should get the Emmy, and if someone else gets it, let it be because they did great, not because the real winner didn’t compete.

    By this logic, why not just pick the Emmys out of a hat so everyone has a chance?

    Should sports teams that win multiple championships not play? Come on. Enough with that idea.

    • Purple says:

      So Michael Phelps should drop out of competition after his 3rd Gold medal, Usain Bolt? The Lakers? Its her job – she’s phenomenal at it and should be recognized for it. Its so easy for “spectators” to sit around and dictate what we think would be the right thing to do however, if the same standard applied to our everyday jobs (i.e. if we were the top sales person 5 years in a row getting the “big” prize) would we be so eager to withdraw our names in order for someone else win”? The answer is no! Its the competition drives us – fair is fair and its not right to imply that she only won because she’s the most popular

      • Kat says:

        Thank you! It’s absurd to suggest that she drop out to give others the chance. She won because she gave the best performance. I am a huge fan of the other actresses that were nominated last night but when it comes down to it, JLD KILLED it in Mother. Why should she stop competing to make it more “fair”? That’s not fair – that’s eliminating one of the best contenders for no reason other than pity.

    • Kel says:

      OMG Clark I couldn’t agree with you more! I mean why not just give everyone a participation trophy like we do with children’s sports? This is ridiculous. If the other actresses want to win then they have to beat the best and that’s JLD.

    • Agree. I know TVLine for a very long time, and this has to be one of the most nonsense articles i’ve ever read in my life. The trophy goes to the BEST. And JLD is the best, end of story. So, she deserved to win all those, and she deserves to win more, if she continues to be the best (which i think she will).

  15. KrisSimsters says:

    She should drop out the race because she’s winning? What kind of BS is that?

  16. Big Mike says:

    This is some of the worst millennial style, ‘everyone gets a trophy’, mentality I’ve ever seen. If she’s the best, she deserves to win. Period. How could someone be satisfied with a pity award, that they know they got because Dreyfus sat out the awards?


  17. 'A' Got a Secret says:

    I don’t see anyone asking Michael Phelps to stop participating in the Olympics.

  18. Its her performances year after year that push others to be better. Why remove her when she betters the playing field to all of our benefit?

  19. kmw says:

    Yes she should. This race has become what it was when Candice Bergen and Helen Hunt won all the time. Time to let someone else win

  20. kyle says:

    I’m sorry but this entire article and you are BULL****…. So, because she does her job and does it WELL she shouldn’t get recognition??? I never thought you were that type of critic Michael Ausiello, but boy was I wrong!

    You should be ashamed for trying to “make a case” for something like this..

    • Fair is Fair says:

      I don’t agree with Michael at all, but don’t f’ing call him BULL****. I wish people would grow up and learn how to criticize the suggestion, not the person. Michael Ausiello is far more than this one idea.

    • MMD says:

      This is Michael Ausiello’s opinion to which he is entitled to, without being attacked, just as everyone else is entitled to their own opinion. No need to get nasty.

  21. ggny says:

    I actually think the women comedy lead field is weak. There is no Tina Fey or Amy Poehler that where snubbed by not winning. Give me someone that can dethrone JLD first

    • Jorf says:

      I honestly thought that if the Academy gave Aya Cash a nomination this year for You’re the Worst, she would’ve beaten JLD. They are both phenomenal.

  22. Ninamags says:

    Completely agree, MIchael.

    How many Emmys do you need on your shelf?

    I love how Candice Bergen and John Larroquette were so gracious and classy in saying thank you but this is enough.

  23. Fair is Fair says:

    Are you suggesting Meryl Streep should not get any more Oscars? Frankly even I roll my eyes a bit when JLD’s name is called, but I have to agree with Elissa — so long as her performance is the best that year, she deserves to win the Emmy.

  24. Nero tTVFiddler says:

    John Larroquette, Candice Bergen.
    No one has forgotten that they won Emmys, even though by taking their name out of contention when they were hot talents at the Emmys, they won fewer Emmys than they probably would have. One or two less on the crowded shelf at home now.
    If JLD wants to keep collecting (and that is all it is at this point) her awards, that is certainly her prerogative. She has that choice. However, one day in the future, she will look at the long line of Emmys on the shelf at home, and she won’t feel as good as she did winning yet another last night.
    It will hit her eventually – it will take time, but she will realize what that long shelf of Emmys really signifies … she was liked, and popular and talented. But at that future moment, none of that will come to her mind. None of it… only regret.
    Regret. That is what is coming. Lucille Ball, Shirley Booth, Hope Lange, Jean Stapleton, Mary Tyler Moore, Jane Curtin, Candice Bergen, Helen Hunt, Patricia Heaton. These are all multiple winners. One looks at that history, that long list and understands why those names are there. Julia L. Dryfuss? The name belongs there on that list as well (very deserving), and multiple times, but five times, or six times, or seven or eight times in a row? Really? Someone needs to stop this embarrassment, and that is what it has become. Who? JLD is the only one who can.
    Do the right thing JDL – only you can. If not for yourself, do it for the integrity of that long list of comedy actress Emmy award winners that rightly includes your name – you deserve to be on that list, multiple times… but, keep that list pristine.

    • hang3xc says:

      Someone needs to stop this embarrassment? Do it for integrity? How can there be any integrity to an award that leaves out the best? How could the next winner feel victorious when they know the only reason they won is because the best withdrew from the competition. There is no integrity winning an award under those circumstances. I would think THAT would be embarrassing.

      The way to win with integrity is for the writers have to do a better job writing and the actors doing a better job acting, but probably more so the writers. If the material isn’t fantastic, there is only so much an actor can do with it.

      • Nero tTVFiddler says:

        From your response, I’m going to assume you don’t agree with my assessment, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion. We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one.
        I do encourage you to check out the comedic work of the other actresses in this category, particularly Ellie Kemper (Kimmy Schmidt) and Lily Tomlin (Grace & Frankie). The writing is quite good on both series, and the performances solid and new.
        An ’embarrassment of riches’ can apply to anyone, perhaps all of us from time to time in our lives. I could be wrong, but someday, JLD will feel that ’embarrassment of riches’, and only she will know how that feels (for her) at the time.

    • Sara says:

      Personally, I think Emmy voters have always been lazy when it comes to voting for the Comedy awards. If you look at the list of winners over the history of the awards, mulitiple winners are far more occuring than in the Drama subsection. It almost seems like the voters don’t watch and just vote for whoever previously won.

    • mary says:

      That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. I mean wow that is just wow. Honestly only about three of those people listed are in the same league as JLD and its on the voters to notice other performances and other performances to meet JLD.

      Just wow

      • Nero tTVFiddler says:

        Wow Mary… thank you for your feedback. Wow. Wow. Just three other actress on that list are deserving? Wow, just three?? Wow. Just wow. I mean, just WOW!! Just three others… out of what, five?? So, three others out for five. Heck, that’s nothing. Right? Who could possibly, possibly be better than the great JLD? Right?

        Good news – I hear JLD may be looking for a new agent? Interested?

    • Mike M says:

      The day an actor or actress regrets 5,6, 7 or however many Emmys (IN A ROW) is the day they are dead. She’s doing the right thing – competing amongst her peers to see who is the best. You’re doing it here too with your repetitive posting. How come you didn’t stop after one then? Especially when you obviously felt you won. I guess you haven’t counted the public votes, but evidently in your favor it’s still a free word where you get to try as many times as you want. And ah, long may that live, regardless of the result, everyone should have the right to be judged by their peers for as long as they want to “enter”. QED.

      • Nero tTVFiddler says:

        Since you are keeping track Mike, I’ll let you have the last word on this one. Now, you’ll feel better, and that’s what important…. you.

        You a entitled to your opinion, as am I and others on this post. Why stop at 7 Mike… we’ll all keep our fingers crossed JDL can get 8, 9, 10. Very good… you have the last word.

  25. Taylor says:

    Perhaps they should create a different category for shows that are 13 episodes or less per season. I’m not sure it is a fair comparison for someone who only has to do 10 episodes instead of 22. I think it would be harder to sustain Emmy level work over a larger number of episodes.

  26. Charles says:

    NO, she should not take herself out of the running since all of her wins are deserved. There is no shame in the best comedic actress of all (imo) time continuing her dominance. The thing I find most awesome about her is despite how great she is on Veep and how great she was on Seinfeld, her best character was Christine (The New Adventures of Old Christine) Campbell.

  27. hang3xc says:

    How could it feel like a genuine win to next years ‘winner” if they didn’t actually beat the best? You HAVE to BEAT the BEST to BE the best. Everyone gets a trophy is dumb for children, who think simply participating makes them special… but carrying it over into adulthood is beyond ridiculous.

    In the 70’s, if you were a bodybuilder, to be the BEST meant beating Arnold. You simply couldn’t be the best any other way. In the 80’s, in boxing, you had to beat Tyson. Same thing. You simply couldn’t be the best any other way. The list goes on and on. Taking away the best, so that others can win, isn’t a win at all and I can’t believe that anyone competing to be the best would want it any other way. It would be a very HOLLOW victory

  28. Britt says:

    Come on, people. There are winners and there are losers. No trophies for wusses for participation.

    Up your game. I would work double hard to be the best, not ask the best to please, step down, you’re making us feel uncomfortable. Honestly…

  29. Leanne says:

    I don’t think bowing out is the answer. I think the rules need to change. I haven’t seen Veep only because I don’t get HBO but I always like JLD. I do feel they entertainment industry needs to get Politics out of entertainment. I guess they don’t think fans are smart enough to make a valid choice. Shame on Kimmel and Vance for bringing politics into the show. The awards have gone down hill because of this. Kimmel was terrible

  30. Eddy Gumienik says:

    Nonsense…if she’s the best at her craft then she should be rewarded for it. The award is called “Best Actress”, not “One of the Best.” When she is no longer the best and the recognition goes to someone else then it would be appropriate to step aside.

  31. denneg says:

    Until the Emmys wake up and realize that they need to split network and cable shows into different categories (thus creating 6 more spots), no one needs to recuse themselves. It’s not her fault she’s brilliant and the category is too large/broad.

  32. Brian says:

    Overall, she really is that good, so she deserves to be rewarded. But part of me would love to see other actresses get a shot a winning or getting a nom (ex. Constance Wu).

  33. Max says:

    Instead of penalizing JLD for being amazing and so richly deserving of every award she receives, why doesn’t the Academy spread the wealth and create a new set of categories for non-broadcast (network) series? Ala the Cable Ace Awards and including Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc.

  34. Anne says:

    I don’t know. It seems arrogant for Ms. Louis-Dreyfus to assume that if she doesn’t bow out, she would get nominated. I know that’s the premise you’re presupposing, but for her to just decide that… Also, if she is still doing groundbreaking work, why shouldn’t she be nominated, and win, if she is deserving?

    Maybe the also-rans ought to step up their games.

  35. JM says:

    I am sick of the same person winning. I have an even more radical suggestion. I think a person should only be able to win once in a lifetime in each category period. Give someone else a chance.

  36. Joel says:

    That’s stupid thinking. The Emmy’s are about a professional showing how they’ve perfected their craft. It’s about their talent. Their skill. And, no one has demonstrated that more than Julia She is BRILLIANT. Don’t turn it into some politically-correct love-fest. That only results in a watered down version that awards vanilla, no-talent blandness. Talent should be the only value that matters.

    Shame on you for even bringing this up.

  37. Antonio Carlos says:

    What a dumb article. She deserves it. If other comedians wants to get an award, then they should try harder, work harder. No one should shine less so others can have the spotlight. It’s very simple: wanna beat her on the awards? Earn it.

  38. hurley says:

    That is just stupid! Absolutely not! She is the BEST and it’s a good thing that she gets recognised for it! Should Meryl Streep remove herself from the Oscar race the next time? Or Usain Bolt not go to the Olympics anymore? Of course not!

  39. Absolutely NOT! It is that simple. At no time would someone say to a man to remove himself from contention so some of his contemporaries can shine brighter. It is okay for men to win (a lot – see Kelsey Grammer), but heaven forbid a woman dominate… well, that is just not ladylike!

    This is appalling.

  40. martinmegz says:

    This is nuts. Why don’t you take yourself out of contention for an award you deserve and then come back and spew this nonsense.

  41. Mike says:

    If USC won 5 titles in a row would you advocate for them to take sit out a playoff? Not an exact equivalency but I think she should keep entering as long as she feels deserving. Plus, I wouldn’t want a win just because someone better than me stepped aside.

  42. Chris says:

    The “the best actress winner wouldn’t win” argument doesn’t work because the nominees this year certainly were not the best comedy actresses. Jane Fonda, Lena Dunham, Rachel Bloom, and Gina Rodriguez did much better work than most of the nominees so are we going to say JLD’s win is tainted because the other nominees weren’t as strong?? JLD has won enough (too much actually) for her role on VEEP and it’s time for someone else to win. There should be a three wins for the same role and you’re out rule.

    • anon says:

      Lena Dunham is not a strong actress so I don’t think she was left out. And I actually thought Gina’s Jane wasn’t as great as she was in season 1 so her not being nominated made sense to me.

  43. I think we’re overlooking another reason she should stay in — the attention it brings to Veep and thereby all the people on that show that benefit from it. These big awards help keep shows on smaller networks on people’s radars, which helps everyone who works on the show.

  44. Walkie says:

    That’s ridiculous. How about the other comedies raise their game?

  45. Spence says:

    I see where this article is coming from, and I agree that I would love for other actresses (Ellie or Tracee, preferably) to have a shot at the trophy. However, I also never believed Tatiana Maslany could win in a field dominated by Viola, Robin, or Claire- all of whom have won before and I thought for sure would win again. The opportunity is out there; I truly believe that the academy doesn’t just hand the award to Julia when seeing her name on the ballot. I don’t think she should be punished for her talents or for the talented writing quality of the show, instead, we just have to have hope that the academy will look at the ballot completely unbiased.

  46. CK says:

    I’d hate to be the actress that “only won because JLD” took herself out of the running.

  47. George R Penny says:

    What is this kindergarten where everyone has to get a trophy?if she is the best she s the best the Emmy Award also helps the show stay in business attracting sponsors etc and keeps a huge crew employed yes it is boring for the press but sorry she will fade out eventually but leave that up to the Emmy voters

  48. iakovos says:

    If Emmy voters choose JL-D to be nominated and to win, that is not her fault. Awards are not participant medals. I have a problem with kudos for something so subjective as art, especially when you throw in the politics of show business. But they exist so as long as everyone plays by the rules…

  49. pickles says:

    She did not deserve an award for Christine that was handed to her and the show was awful.

  50. Absolutely not.

    1) It should not be the “second place” award. It’s an Emmy award. If you want to dethrone Julia write better material and act your heart out with that material.

    2) Think of what you’re asking her to do. She’s building a legacy. I think that’s what any athlete, actor, politician, business owner etc. wants to do. You wouldn’t tell Bill Belichick to stop winning, it’s enough already. When they’re gone, fans will remember them through the legacy they built. She’s played two iconic characters and deserves to win a bunch of Emmys.

    • Temperance says:

      You should only be allowed to win one Emmy per role. Period.

      • Why? You’re looking for the Oscars, not the Emmys. If a new season of the show comes out every year why would you propose they can’t get nominated every year?

      • Jen says:

        God forbid anyone continue to be good at their job after being recognized for a promotion over their colleagues. One promotion is enough! Keep working hard and let the remaining workforce be promoted for the rest of time.

        I can’t believe this is even an article on TVLine, or that there are supporters of this utterly ridiculous notion.