Why a Jimmy Kimmel Booking Turned Into a Soap-Level Drama

General Hospital star Nancy Lee Grahn just turned a routine late-night booking into a mini culture-war episode, publicly objecting to Jimmy Kimmel hosting country superstar Carrie Underwood on Jimmy Kimmel Live!. What might look like a simple talk-show appearance is actually plugged into a larger story about celebrity politics, fandom identity, and how TV personalities navigate the post-2024 political landscape.


Nancy Lee Grahn alongside Jimmy Kimmel and Carrie Underwood in a composite promotional image
Nancy Lee Grahn, Jimmy Kimmel, and Carrie Underwood became unexpected players in a new clash between soap fandom and late-night TV.

The Players: Nancy Lee Grahn, Carrie Underwood, and Jimmy Kimmel

Nancy Lee Grahn has been a daytime TV fixture since the 1990s, playing Alexis Davis on ABC’s long-running soap General Hospital since 1996. Off-screen, she’s known as one of daytime’s most outspoken political voices, especially on social media, where she has been an unapologetic critic of Donald Trump and right-wing politics.

Carrie Underwood, meanwhile, is one of country music’s biggest crossover stars, with a fan base that stretches from Nashville to mainstream pop audiences and NFL Sunday Night Football viewers. While she’s generally kept her politics relatively private, online discourse has occasionally painted her as adjacent to more conservative-leaning spaces, a perception that hovers around many country performers.

Jimmy Kimmel occupies yet another lane: a late-night host who started as an irreverent bro-comic on The Man Show and evolved into one of broadcast TV’s more openly political late-night voices, frequently criticizing Trump, election denialism, and disinformation on his ABC show.


Late-night talk shows sit at the intersection of entertainment, politics, and celebrity branding.

What Nancy Lee Grahn Actually Said About Carrie Underwood on Kimmel

When news and promotion circulated that Carrie Underwood would appear on Jimmy Kimmel Live!, Nancy Lee Grahn responded on social media with a pointed reaction aimed less at Underwood’s music and more at what the booking symbolized to her.

“See ya next week.”

Short, sharp, and unmistakably disapproving, Grahn’s “See ya next week” read like a viewer announcing a temporary boycott. For fans familiar with her politics, it was clear she was registering discomfort with Kimmel platforming someone she associates—fairly or not—with a camp she strongly opposes.

The phrasing is telling. She doesn’t say she’s canceling Kimmel; instead, she frames it as a brief step back, a kind of symbolic protest during Underwood’s appearance. In the attention economy of 2026, even “I’ll skip this episode” is a micro-political act, especially when your follower base is tuned into your ideological compass.


Person using a smartphone to post on social media in a dimly lit room
A single social media post from a longtime TV star can spark an outsized conversation about culture and politics.

Celebrity Politics, Fandom, and the Late-Night Balancing Act

To understand why Grahn’s reaction resonated, you have to zoom out to the broader ecosystem. Over the past decade, late-night TV has increasingly doubled as a political commentary platform. Stephen Colbert, Seth Meyers, and Kimmel himself have all leaned into political monologues, especially during and after the Trump years.

At the same time, fandom culture has become far more ideological. Supporting or rejecting an artist is often framed as a statement of values. Country music in particular has long been stereotyped as conservative, and while that’s an oversimplification, it shapes how artists like Carrie Underwood are read by viewers with strongly held political positions.

That’s the tension in Grahn’s comment: she sees Kimmel as part of the “resistance” late-night club, and she’s wary when that platform intersects with a star she perceives as orbiting a different ideological camp. For her—and for fans who share her worldview—this isn’t merely about music; it’s about signaling what and whom you choose to amplify.


Audience watching a live TV show taping with colorful stage lights
Viewers now read bookings and guest lists as carefully as they watch the actual interviews.

How This Plays Inside ABC and the Entertainment Industry

From an industry perspective, Grahn’s reaction is a reminder that networks manage not just audiences but internal ecosystems of talent. ABC has a daytime legacy brand and a late-night brand that increasingly attract different slices of the political spectrum—even when they share the same corporate roof.

  • For ABC: Kimmel booking Carrie Underwood is a ratings and synergy play. You get country viewers, pop fans, and viewers who just like star power.
  • For Grahn: Speaking out fits her personal brand as an actor who uses her platform for political and social commentary.
  • For Underwood: It’s a standard promotional circuit stop, even if online discourse tries to turn it into a referendum on values.

Networks have largely accepted that their stars will take public stances, especially on social media. What’s new is the intra-network tension playing out in real time, with daytime stalwarts effectively commenting on late-night booking strategy—something that would have stayed behind closed doors in the pre-Twitter era.

In 2026, brand safety isn’t just about advertising; it’s about how your own talent perceives your other talent.

Office building with multiple TV network logos displayed on signage
Shared corporate umbrellas mean daytime and late-night personalities inevitably collide in the public conversation.

The Upside and Downside of Grahn’s Public Pushback

Looking at this as a “performance” in the ongoing show that is celebrity-politics, Grahn’s move has both strengths and weaknesses.

Where it lands well

  • Consistency: Fans know Grahn as politically vocal; staying silent here would have felt off-brand for her most engaged followers.
  • Clarity without vitriol: “See ya next week” is pointed but relatively restrained—she signals disapproval without resorting to personal attacks.
  • Conversation starter: She taps into a genuine question: what responsibility do politically outspoken hosts have regarding the guests they platform?

Where it gets messy

  • Assumptions about Underwood: A lot of the discourse rests on political inferences around Underwood rather than explicit statements, which can be shaky ground.
  • Collateral fan conflicts: Soap fans, country fans, and Kimmel regulars don’t fully overlap; clashes between those online communities can turn toxic fast.
  • Network optics: Public intra-network criticism always risks the appearance of internal division, even if ABC ultimately shrugs it off.

Within entertainment fandoms, even subtle gestures like “I’ll skip this episode” become part of a larger debate about values and visibility.

For viewers and readers who want to see how this played out on screen and in the press, here are some starting points:

ABC and YouTube typically host the official Jimmy Kimmel Live! segments, so fans can judge the tone of the Underwood appearance themselves rather than relying purely on social media reaction.


Person browsing streaming platforms on a laptop with headphones nearby
Most late-night segments now live well beyond broadcast, reshaped by clips, reactions, and commentary across platforms.

What This Dust-Up Tells Us About TV in 2026

Nancy Lee Grahn’s “See ya next week” isn’t the biggest scandal of the year, but it’s a neat snapshot of where entertainment culture sits in 2026. A daytime icon can publicly side-eye a late-night booking, fans can instantly turn that into a discourse thread, and an otherwise routine promotional appearance for Carrie Underwood becomes a Rorschach test for how people feel about politics in entertainment.

Going forward, it’s unlikely networks will stop pairing politically outspoken hosts with guests who appeal across ideological lines; that’s the business. But moments like this suggest that performers, even within the same corporate family, will keep using their voices to draw personal lines about who they choose to watch, support, or skip.

The real question isn’t whether a soap star tunes out for one night; it’s how many viewers quietly make similar choices—and what that means for the already fragile equilibrium between politics, pop culture, and prime-time TV.