'Outnumbered' panelists discuss the impact of Democrats' rhetoric as White House officials continue calling former President Trump a 'threat.'

This column began as a post on X/Twitter, one which resonated with the audience. Here is the revised and extended version of why former President Donald Trump should win your vote.

Voting has begun in Pennsylvania, perhaps the single most crucial state in this election.

Voting for president will accelerate on Saturday when Virginia opens its doors to early, in-person voting. Trump took to X on Tuesday, September 17, to urge Pennsylvania voters to get out and vote early. Republicans across the country seem to have fully absorbed the necessity of voting early — it is crucial in a race this close — but only the final tally will tell if they got the message.

TRUMP ADVISER UNPACKS WHY FORMER PRESIDENT IS HOLDING RALLY IN DEEP-BLUE STATE WEEKS FROM ELECTION

Analyst Nate Silver's "prediction of victory odds" gave Trump a 59.7% chance of winning the election and Vice President Kamala Harris a 40% chance of winning on Tuesday morning, a week after the debate. (Note: Silver’s analysis is not a poll, but rather the widely respected Silver’s assessment of the odds of winning based on all the state polls and other crucial data.)

Former President Trump was injured during an assassination attempt at a rally in Butler, Pa., on July 13, 2024. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Polls taken after the debate but before the second assassination attempt on Trump have Harris slightly ahead nationally but very much within the margin of error. Most analysts say she got a small bump from the debate but it is margin-of-error stuff at best and may be changing as she stumbles through the aftermath. (Her appearance before the National Association of Black Journalists was a fiasco for her if anyone sees it. She remains a jukebox with very few choices among her answers, all of them bad. A 7% cap on the cost of childcare?) The race is a frozen, jump ball of a race, with each candidate possessing a good chance of winning.

The takeaway from all this, and what I emphasized in my opening monologue on Tuesday, is that "the choice," voters must make is underway is upon them even as it is very much being debated across the country.

That "choice" is between Trump/Ohio Sen. JD Vance, Trump's national security team, and his 3,000 other political appointees and Harris/ Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, her national security team and her 3,000 other appointees.

At the end of his first term, Trump had Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, National Security Advisor Ambassador Robert C. O’Brien, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe and many more who are expected to return in a second Trump term in some role. Harris's national security choices are almost a complete unknown save for Philip Gordon, her current National Security Advisor (a very unsettling prospect according to people who I know who know his record.)

A key consideration for voters should be the national security team Trump or Harris will bring with them, along with the 3,000 appointees they will also place in every agency of the vast federal government beginning in late January.

Trump's appointees will be center-right to conservative men and women and Harris's appointees are almost wholly unknown but, in many if not most cases, will be out-and-out radicals, far to the left of the mainstream. That’s the San Francisco way. That’s why San Francisco, Oakland and Berkeley are in such ruins. They are all run by extreme "progressives," which really means radicals.

Each candidate would also get to nominate judges and perhaps a Supreme Court justice or two, though there are no vacancies on the highest court now as there was when America voted in 2016.

Trump’s and Harris’s views on judges as well as every other big issue are so completely different --on the need for a defense buildup, for the continuation of the 2017 tax cuts (they expire in 2025 if not extended and Trump wants to extend them and Harris does........

© Fox News