George W. Bush was a bad president.

Framework My opponent goes for a standards analysis and argues that my consequentialist standard is a separate standard. However, my argument is that consequentialism is a macro-standard whereas peace, prosperity and freedom are all micro-standards. As I mentioned under the analysis, all of his standards presuppose a consequentialist analysis. Thus as long as I can link into this consequential analysis and/or outweigh my opponent on the standards then I win a stronger link to the macro and micro standards. Sources His only argument is that I am not making my own arguments which is bad. However, there is a difference between an original argument and a paraphrased or direct quoted argument. Nothing my opponent provided was an original argument, he simply took the arguments from external sources and re-worded them. However, he drops my analysis that direct quotes protects better against manipulation of evidence. Thus, I turned his methodology (metho=bad) which means I should get the source vote. C1: Iraq My opponent throughout this whole debate never responds to the two internal links to the standard of peace. Extend the stats that comparatively, the war has saved more individuals from democide and political killings and from war then the casualties that have resulted from the War in Iraq. Refer to these arguments in the previous rounds. This should be reason to vote Con on arguments because more lives have been saved and more peace has been achieved (prevention of war and prevention of more intervention). Moreover, the terror argument does dropped in the last round which tells us that due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan terrorism against the U.S. is weakened tremendously since all terror cell efforts are distracted and reallocated. As such, from a national security perspective the Bush Administration was strategically intune. And this standard of peace outweighs all other standards because it has the strongest link to the implied presupposition of consequentialism. This is true because as I mentioned previously, life outweighs since all other standards presuppose some basic standard of life: one cannot exercise their freedoms without life. C2: Recession, Politics Advantage My opponent still seems to misunderstand the application of the politics advantage. My argument is that lives saved from preventing Iranian proliferation links into a peace/life/consequential standard which outweighs the recession argument. My opponent doesn’t argue substantively against any of the individual arguments in the politics advantage. As such, my opponent concedes that having Obama lose, which is a direct result of the recession and the swing of moderates and undecided, outweighs the unstated harms of the recession. C3: Free Trade He is simply asserting free trade good without any warrants at all. But aside from that fact just saying managed trade exists thus Bush can never be a good trade president isn’t sufficiently responsive. Remember I told you in the last round that Bush pushed for and signed various FTA’s which rapidly expanded and decreased the amount of protectionism between those specific countries. C4: Constitution Lol, he tries to argue against it without even understanding the analysis. Mansfield tells us that due to the omission of regulations, the use of the word upholding the “office of the executive”, i.e. the powers and responsibilities of the President, and the fact that analyzing the works of Madison indicates that the executive power refers to the ability of the President to respond to emergency crises which means for the protection of the free state itself the President has the ability to suspend rights. But either way he never refutes the analysis. It goes extended. Conclusion At this point the sheer amount of turns I have placed on my opponent prove that his own case is reason to vote against him: 1) Iraq was good since it has prevented future democide, war and terrorism. 2) The recession was actually a good thing since it means Obama will be kicked outta office which will prevent Iranian proliferation. On the standards (framework): I have linked to peace in multiple scenarios, I have outweighed the prosperity argument with a strong link to peace, and I have mooted the point of freedom since the suspension of freedom is sometimes necessary for the survival of the people of the free state.