Stacey Abrams has been hiding from the public eye. But now she’s back in it for the worst reason.
And two-time loser Stacey Abrams is utterly humiliated again for a hilarious reason.
Harvard’s Misstep in Elevating Stacey Abrams as a “Political Mastermind”
Harvard University’s decision to label two-time Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams as a “political mastermind” in a new seminar has raised eyebrows, particularly given her lack of electoral success and questionable claims about past campaigns, which some argue overstates her influence and risks undermining the course’s credibility.
The fall 2025 course, titled “Race, Gender, and the Law Through the Archive,” examines the historical impact of race and gender on American law, with a focus on “the role that Black women and non-binary people have played in shaping politics, grassroots organizing, the legal bar, and higher education during Jim (Jane) Crow and beyond.”
Embarrassingly, the university misspelled Abrams’ name as “Stacy” in the course description, a detail that reflects poorly on the institution’s attention to accuracy when spotlighting figures like Abrams.
“From First Lady Michelle Obama to political mastermind Stacy Abrams [sic] to Vice President Kamala Harris, Black women have left their stamp on 21st-century politics and grassroots organizing,” the description reads, as part of a class led by Professor Myisha Eatmon, a historian known for provocative statements like calling “white privilege a drug” in a now-private X post from November 2020, according to the Washington Free Beacon.
Abrams’ inclusion alongside accomplished figures like Obama and Harris stands out, as her political record—marked by losses to Republican Brian Kemp in the 2018 and 2022 Georgia gubernatorial races and no federal office experience—lacks the tangible victories one might expect from a “mastermind.”
Her repeated assertions after the 2018 defeat that the election was “stolen” and “rigged,” later retracted amid criticism for election denialism during her 2022 campaign, as reported by the Washington Post, cast further doubt on her strategic acumen.
Course Focus on Race and Gender in Legal History
The four-credit seminar aims to explore how race, gender, and s*xuality have shaped political ideologies, drawing on the contributions of prominent civil rights-era lawyers, philosophers, and writers.
By situating Abrams as a central figure, however, the course risks diverting attention from more impactful leaders, potentially diminishing the focus on substantive contributions to legal and political advancements.
Implications for Educational Integrity and Public Discourse
Harvard’s decision to elevate Abrams, despite her polarizing record and the misspelling error, highlights a challenge in academic settings: balancing recognition of grassroots efforts with the need for rigorous, merit-based evaluation of political figures.
For American students and taxpayers, who often bear the financial burden of higher education through loans or public funding, such missteps raise questions about the prioritization of narrative over substance in elite institutions.
The course’s emphasis on influential Black women is a valuable contribution to understanding America’s legal and political evolution, but its framing of Abrams as a “mastermind” alongside more established figures like Harris and Obama may prompt skepticism about whether it serves to educate or to promote a particular agenda.
Ensuring that academic offerings reflect precision and credibility remains essential for fostering informed citizens equipped to engage in the nation’s democratic processes.
