President Trump is a good President.

I will sure up loose ends by using the same labels my opponent used for their arguments, responding, and then summarizing my argument.1) Framework:My opponent attempts to reframe what it means to be a good President. I stand by what I've said up to this point, with one small addition: My opponent mentioned the President should represent the people of the USA and work for their interests, yet he judges President Trump based on what people of other countries think of him. I'm sure it doesn't make Germans, the French, the Dutch, etc. happy to hear that they will have to pay more taxpayer dollars to NATO, yet that is what is good for the interests of Americans. My opponent tries to take credit away from Trump on policy by giving it to Congress, but this ignores not only the massive power the President has, but also the massive influence the President has on Congress.2) Leadership:My opponent misrepresents my position by saying occassionally unpopular leaders are good. My argument was actually that leadership is inherently unpopular. If one is just following popular opinion, he is not really leading at all.3) Foreign Relations:I raise issue with source #2, which my opponent relies on for their argument that South Korea and Australia are drifting away from the USA towards China. First, there is an error where they say that trade is in billions when it is actaully in millions. Second, the data is from 2015, before Trump ever took office, and there is not any more recent data given to show a trend. When I looked up Chinese trade partners, there didn't seem to be this drastic change.[1][2] My opponent talks a lot about polls of people in other countries, but they talk little about the actions of foreign allied leaders that would show allied countries moving away from the USA in any meaningful way.4) Refutations:A) North Korea: My opponent simplifies my main argument as "different", and then they attempt to contradict me by stating North Korea's actions are the same as the past. It's true that some of North Korea's actions appear the same, but as I pointed out before, the variables are different. For instance, there are new administrations in both countries, and the sancitons have been extremely devastating to North Korea's economy. I did previously point out many actions that were different. What is effectively happening as we speak is Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in are meeting at the Korean border to shake hands.[3] It may be easy to try to dismiss this as North and South Korea having had some relations in the past, but that really misses how radically different these new and public relation developments are. So while some North Korean actions appear the same, they are under different variables, and other actions are radically different from what we've seen in the past.B) ISIS: I'll stand by what I argued previously. Former President Obama and President Trump both deserve credit for defeating ISIS. I'll just add that my opponent on this topic and on others, has used a lot of Left-leaning sources (which are naturally anti-Trump) that state a lot of opinions and speculation, but they are much lighter on facts. Often these opinions and speculation are attempting to explain away facts that are positive for President Trump, and I encourage the voters to consider that.C) Border Security: My opponent's argument is overly semantical. The reason I stated Trump has made efforts is because a border wall isn't going to be built in a year, especially when Democrats have obstructed[4], yet I showed clear steps Trump has been taking and clear progress that has been made.D) Economy: Rather than attempt to take on the substance of my statement, my opponent takes the weaker method of dismissal, claiming I did not validate my claims. My opponent prefers their argument because of two sources to an alleged zero. I would like to point out just how much more I have sourced with more reliable sourcing, and so if we are to judge by the numbres, I easily win this debate. I don't think that's a good way to judge a debate, though.I did specifically state how Obama's unemployment rate divided by the unemployment rate drop had been lowering each year for 3 straight years, and then Trump drastically raised the percentage in 2017. I gave the specific numbers.[5] On tariffs, I will reiterate my argument that Trump is using tariffs for leverage to lower trade deficits, not as an economic principle.[6] I also refer to previous arguments such as stock market growth and economic outlook. I'll add in the economic confidence index.[7]Summary:I have established that Trump is a good President by pointing to hard results. My core arguments pointed to accomplishments and progress with North Korea, ISIS, border security, and the economy. I have established my arguments with extensive sourcing, mostly from Left-leaning media that opposes President Trump, but also with a variety of sources. The established accomplishments have not only benefited the USA greatly now, but also position the USA well for the future. President Trump is a good President.Sources:[1]: https://www.census.gov...[2]: https://wits.worldbank.org...[3]: https://www.telegraph.co.uk...[4]: http://news.google.com...[5]: https://data.bls.gov...[6]: https://www.straitstimes.com...[7]: https://data.oecd.org...