World News

Again, in making such decisions, all we can judge by is the evidence in front of our eyes. I observe:

1. Liberal parties currently in power in Anglo countries are offering no meaningful resistance to Israel. None have stopped weapons shipments.

2. There is broad refusal among the Democratic centrists, who Kamala is a firm member, to endorse Mamdani, primarily due to his stance on Israel.

3. A continuation among Democratic party leaders to hold the line on Israel. Congressional Democrats haven't used what limited leverage they do have to slow the flow of weapons to Israel at all.

4. A complete silence on Kamala since the election on the Israel issue. She's still a very influential voice in the party, and she still has political aspirations. She now doesn't even have the Biden admin keeping her on a short leash.

I am a scientist. I try to make judgments based on what I can directly observe. The default stance of centrist Democrats and of every liberal government in the Anglosphere has been continued unconditional support of Israel, even to today. And since Kamala hasn't stated anything to the contrary, the median observable behavior of politicians like herself is the best predictor we have of how she would have behaved as president. If you take a dispassionate evidence-based view of the issue, it's pretty clear that there would be no difference in the Gaza outcome between Kamala and Trump. Their policies are both 100% full support of the Israeli regime. Trump is just a lot more crass and cruel about it. Kamala virtue signals, Trump vice signals. But in terms of actual policy outcomes, their Israel policies are identical.