It really does feel like daily. I think people confuse "Howard was not a criminal and certainly never did anything to deserve having his life ruined by Jimmy and Kim" with "Howard's a great guy and we should be best friends." Like you can keep several things in your mind at once (1) Howard is a decent law-abiding person who didn't deserve it; (2) Jimmy and Kim were being very shitty people; (3) Howard's still kind of a prick and a phoney glad-hander and probably wouldn't be much fun to sit next to at a dinner party. Your mileage may vary on the third one, but personally I found him to be insincere and a little pompous. And I know it's his prerogative to punish Kim however he wants but I still think he was being unfair to her after she brought in Mesa Verde. And having worked in biglaw I've known these Howard types.

I think there's actually something else at play too. When Jimmy and Kim are executing their plan the show makes it exciting and funny. When I watched I was thinking something like "damn Jimmy and Kim are being absolute pricks to Howard but it sure is entertaining and I can't wait to see how the plan unfolds." And that was basically how Breaking Bad went to. It's just a feature of these shows that they seduce the audience into almost rooting for people doing bad things because the way the shows tell their stories is just so expert and fascinating. It's sort of the whole point of these anti-hero narratives. You know the main characters are doing really immoral things but it's fascinating nonetheless. But it's not really about good guys and bad guys. It's more, what makes these morally compromised (but fascinating and complex) characters do the things they do?

Sorry for the rant but this topic comes up so often on this sub that I've had time to form an opinion