This is not serious political commentary. It’s what she believes she has to say to build her audience.
Note that she has zero evidence to buttress her claims about Gaza beyond the usual, heavily recycled (and redacted) clips and statements put out by the activists, NGOs and other Hamas-approved allies and organs.
Meanwhile, he’s simply reporting the numbers from last week’s midterms — numbers that have been reported independently by journalists, campaigns, and state and local officials. He’s making a case against the radicalism of the Free Palestine agenda, and she’s dismissing it out of hand, saying that’s terrible advice (does she have any data to support her argument? she doesn’t say) while adding that that advice is “repugnant” (which would be reasonable if she knew what she was talking about, but she doesn’t know what she’s talking about).
There is a dangerous chasm that has opened up in the Democratic orbit, one that pits the office-holders against the influencer-podcasters. Rubin is a function of the former; Ball is, well, of the latter. Rubin is trying to point the party toward victory; Ball, who wields far more power than Rubin does, is trying to burnish her brand. Those two ends, or personalities, are hardly aligned. In fact, I tend to think they’re indirectly related.