Here’s the full piece with just the Carlson paragraph tightened and expanded:
For decades, strong American support for Israel seemed almost certain—particularly within the Republican Party. Today, that consensus is beginning to fracture on both sides of the political spectrum.
Consider the differences emerging on the American right.
Marco Rubio represents the more traditional strongly pro-Israel position, viewing Israel as a critical strategic ally and Iran and its proxies as major shared threats.
Donald Trump remains strongly associated with support for Israel, but his approach is increasingly transactional. His administration is currently pressing a Gaza plan built around Hamas disarmament and phased Israeli withdrawal—even though Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has resisted important elements of it.
J.D. Vance represents the emerging America First position: Israel remains an ally, but American interests come first, and Washington should not automatically follow Israel into Middle Eastern conflicts.
Tucker Carlson has moved considerably further, questioning whether America's unusually close relationship with Israel serves U.S. interests at all. He has also suggested helping launch a third-party movement built largely around America First and conservative principles. Such a candidate could draw disproportionately from Republican voters, potentially splitting the conservative vote in 2028 and making a Democratic victory more likely—even though Carlson's movement would itself be largely conservative.
But something equally important is happening within the Democratic Party.
What Could a Democratic Administration Mean?
The 2028 Democratic nomination is still wide open, but Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are among the prominent prospective contenders.
And their approaches illustrate just how much Democratic politics surrounding Israel has changed.
Harris has historically supported Israel's right to defend itself while also emphasizing Palestinian civilian suffering, ceasefires and a two-state solution. Interestingly, she has recently reached out to progressive and pro-Palestinian activists as she considers her political future.
Newsom still describes himself as a supporter of the State of Israel but has become sharply critical of Netanyahu. He has questioned American military assistance and even briefly used the term “apartheid” when discussing Israel before clarifying that he meant Israel could move in that direction if current policies continue.
AOC represents the party's progressive wing, where skepticism toward Israeli military policy and American support for it is considerably stronger.
Consequently, a Democratic victory in 2028 would not automatically mean America abandons Israel. Who wins the Democratic nomination would matter enormously.
Yet the larger trend is difficult to miss: unconditional American support for Israel can no longer be considered politically permanent.
Why Prophecy Students Should Pay Attention
None of this proves fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
But it is interesting.
Scripture portrays an Israel that ultimately becomes increasingly isolated among the nations. Zechariah 12:3 says:
“And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people…”
Meanwhile, Ezekiel 38 describes Israel facing an enormous coalition of enemies while other nations appear unable—or unwilling—to intervene decisively.
That raises a question prophecy students have asked for decades:
Where is the United States?
Perhaps America declines economically or militarily. Perhaps its geopolitical priorities simply change. Perhaps future American leaders decide that defending Israel is no longer in America's interests. From a pre-tribulation perspective, we can also contemplate the enormous societal disruption that could follow the sudden disappearance of millions of Christians.
Scripture simply doesn't tell us.
What we can observe, however, is something remarkable.
Across American politics, the debate is gradually shifting from:
“Should America support Israel?”
to:
“Under what circumstances should America support Israel?”
That distinction could eventually prove enormously consequential.
Bible prophecy should never be forced into today's headlines. Scripture should interpret the headlines—not the other way around.
But when political and geopolitical developments begin making circumstances described thousands of years ago increasingly plausible, Christians would be wise to pay attention.
We don't need to predict exactly how the pieces will fall into place.
We simply need to recognize that pieces once difficult to imagine are becoming easier to see.
As Jesus repeatedly instructed His followers:
Watch.
