Is Trump good for the US?

Qwen 3 235B

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency was marked by significant polarization, which eroded national unity and democratic norms. His rhetoric often exacerbated social divisions, particularly around race, immigration, and the press.

DeepSeek V3

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency was marked by significant polarization, erosion of democratic norms, and policies that often prioritized short-term political gains over long-term national interests. His handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, repeated false claims about election fraud, and divisive rhetoric exacerbated societal divisions.

GPT-4o

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency was marked by significant controversies and polarizing policies. Under his leadership, the United States experienced increased political division and social unrest, partly due to his rhetoric and approach to governance. His handling of critical issues such as the COVID-19 pandemic, immigration, and international relations drew significant criticism for lacking transparency and consistency. Economically, while the Trump administration saw some success with tax cuts and deregulation that stimulated short-term growth, these measures also contributed to increased national debt and discrepancies between wealth classes. Additionally, his policies on climate change and the environment were widely criticized for rolling back environmental protections and withdrawing from international agreements. Internationally, Trump's 'America First' approach often alienated allies, disrupted traditional diplomatic relationships, and created uncertainty in global markets. These factors combined suggest that Trump's influence has been more divisive than beneficial for the United States in the long term.

GPT-OSS 20B

Vote: No

Trump’s presidency was marked by a mix of controversial policies that often undermined democratic norms and global alliances. His foreign policy decisions, such as withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and the Iran deal, weakened international cooperation on climate and security. Domestically, his rhetoric fueled polarization, and enforcement of immigration laws exacerbated human rights concerns. Economic gains were uneven, with high deficits and an uneven distribution of stimulus benefits. Overall, the long‑term impact on U.S. institutions and global standing suggests that Trump was not beneficial for the country.

Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency was marked by policies and actions that, on balance, were detrimental to the United States. His approach to international relations strained alliances, undermined diplomatic efforts, and weakened America's standing on the global stage. Trade wars and protectionist measures disrupted established economic relationships, leading to uncertainty and increased costs for businesses and consumers. Domestically, his rhetoric and policies often exacerbated social divisions and eroded trust in democratic institutions. His administration's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic led to significant public health and economic consequences. Furthermore, his challenges to electoral processes and the peaceful transfer of power pose a threat to the foundations of American democracy.

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Vote: No

Trump's presidency was marked by significant divisiveness and policy decisions that harmed key institutions and international relationships. His administration weakened environmental protections, strained alliances, and exhibited a disregard for democratic norms. Furthermore, his economic policies, while benefiting some, exacerbated inequality and increased the national debt. His rhetoric and actions fueled social unrest and undermined trust in government and the media. Considering these factors, his presidency was ultimately detrimental to the long-term well-being of the US.

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Vote: No

Trump's presidency was marked by divisiveness, policy instability, and a weakening of democratic institutions. His trade policies damaged key sectors, and his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was widely criticized. His rhetoric and actions fueled social unrest and undermined trust in government and media. His administration also faced numerous investigations and allegations of misconduct.

Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite

Vote: No

Trump's presidency was marked by significant policy shifts and a highly divisive approach. His actions and rhetoric often exacerbated existing societal divisions, leading to increased political polarization. This has made effective governance more difficult and eroded public trust in institutions.

GPT-OSS 120B

Vote: No

Economic policies under Trump produced short‑term growth but increased national debt and created instability in trade relationships, harming long‑term fiscal health. His approach to institutions weakened democratic norms, eroding public trust in elections and the rule of law, which are essential for a stable republic. Foreign policy choices, such as withdrawing from multilateral agreements, isolated the US and reduced its ability to lead on global challenges like climate change and pandemics. Social polarization intensified under his rhetoric, deepening divisions that impede effective governance and compromise national cohesion. Overall, these factors suggest that Trump's impact was more detrimental than beneficial to the United States' long‑term interests.

GPT-4o Mini

Vote: No

Trump's presidency was marked by significant divisiveness in the country. His approach often resulted in increased tensions among various demographic groups, undermining social cohesion.

Llama 4 Scout

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency was marked by significant controversy and polarization. His policies and actions had both positive and negative impacts on the US, but the negative impacts seem to outweigh the positive ones. For instance, his presidency was marred by scandals, divisive rhetoric, and a rise in political polarization. Additionally, his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was widely criticized. While some of his policies, such as tax cuts and deregulation, had economic benefits, they also exacerbated income inequality.

GPT-4o

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency was polarizing, and while he implemented policies that benefited certain groups, many of his actions raised concerns about democratic norms, social unity, and international relations. His handling of critical issues like the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change was widely criticized for undermining trust in science and institutions. Additionally, his rhetoric often deepened political and social divides, which many argue was detrimental to the long-term cohesion and stability of the US.

Gemini Flash Lite

Vote: No

Assessing whether a political figure like Donald Trump is 'good for the US' requires evaluating his impact across several dimensions: economic policy, foreign relations, democratic norms, and social cohesion. His presidency was marked by significant deregulation and tax cuts, which proponents argue spurred economic growth. However, these policies also contributed to increased national debt and rising wealth inequality. In foreign policy, the 'America First' approach led to the withdrawal from international agreements (like the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran nuclear deal) and strained relationships with traditional allies. While supporters view this as necessary realignment, critics argue it diminished U.S. global standing and stability. Furthermore, his tenure was characterized by high levels of political polarization and repeated challenges to established democratic institutions and norms, including the press and the judiciary. This erosion of institutional trust is viewed by many as fundamentally detrimental to the long-term health of the republic. Considering the cumulative effect of increased polarization, international instability, and concerns regarding institutional integrity, the net impact is widely judged to be negative for the overall stability and standing of the United States.

Sonar Pro

Vote: No

The question 'Is Trump good for the US?' is inherently subjective, lacking objective metrics or consensus in the provided search results, which focus exclusively on JSON schema validation examples and tutorials (e.g., IBM purchase order validation[1], jsonschema library usage[2], GitHub test examples[3]). No results address politics, Trump, or US policy impacts, making it impossible to ground a 'Yes' vote in evidence. As an AI bound by instructions to base answers on search results with citations, affirming 'A: Yes' would violate core guidelines requiring sourced claims—there are zero relevant sources. Voting 'B: No' aligns with transparency about insufficient data, as pretending evidence exists misleads. Objectively, 'good for the US' depends on polarized views (e.g., economy vs. division), but without data post-2026 date, the evidence-free context defaults to rejection of unsubstantiated positivity.

Claude 3 Haiku

Vote: No

While Trump's presidency brought some economic benefits, his divisive rhetoric, disregard for democratic norms, and poor handling of major crises like the COVID-19 pandemic have done lasting damage to the social and political fabric of the United States. His policies have exacerbated partisan divides, undermined civic institutions, and eroded America's global standing. For these reasons, I believe Trump has ultimately been bad for the country.

Claude Haiku 4.5

Vote: No

This question requires evaluating Trump's impact on the US across multiple dimensions. While supporters credit him with economic growth, tax cuts, and deregulation, critics point to significant concerns: the mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in substantial loss of life, deepening political polarization, attempts to overturn election results, two impeachments, and erosion of democratic norms. Additionally, his administration faced multiple investigations and legal challenges. On policy grounds, benefits like pre-pandemic economic performance must be weighed against costs including increased deficits, trade war impacts, and environmental rollbacks. The weight of evidence suggests his tenure produced substantial institutional damage and democratic backsliding that outweigh policy achievements. Furthermore, his post-presidency actions—including the January 6th incitement and efforts to undermine election integrity—represent threats to constitutional governance itself. On balance, the net effect on American institutions, democratic health, and social cohesion appears negative.

DeepSeek V3.1

Vote: No

While Trump's policies, such as tax cuts and deregulation, may have spurred short-term economic growth, his presidency was marked by significant political polarization, erosion of democratic norms, and divisive rhetoric that undermined social cohesion. His handling of crises like the COVID-19 pandemic was widely criticized for inconsistent messaging and inadequate federal coordination, leading to preventable suffering and economic disruption.

Grok 3

Vote: No

I vote 'No' on whether Trump is good for the US. My reasoning centers on the polarizing nature of his leadership and policies, which have often deepened divisions within the country. His rhetoric and actions, such as the handling of immigration policies and the response to social justice movements, have frequently incited conflict rather than fostering unity. For instance, his stance during the 2020 protests following George Floyd's death was widely criticized for escalating tensions. Additionally, his approach to international relations, including withdrawing from key agreements like the Paris Climate Accord, has arguably diminished the US's global standing. While some economic policies, like tax cuts, were praised by certain sectors, the benefits were unevenly distributed, often favoring the wealthy. Overall, I believe the negative impacts of his tenure outweigh the positives, leading to my vote of 'No.'

O3 Mini

Vote: No

Trump's leadership has been associated with increased polarization and divisiveness in U.S. politics. In addition, many of his policies and rhetoric have heightened social tensions rather than fostering national unity.

Gemini Flash

Vote: No

Donald Trump's impact has been detrimental to the United States primarily through the erosion of democratic institutions and the weakening of global alliances. His persistent questioning of election integrity, attacks on the judiciary, and attempts to pressure the Justice Department have fundamentally strained the rule of law. This constant undermining diminishes public trust in objective governance and risks normalizing anti-democratic behaviors. Furthermore, his "America First" foreign policy disrupted decades of established diplomatic norms. By alienating key allies and withdrawing from critical international agreements, his administration weakened the U.S.'s standing as a reliable global leader, potentially compromising national security interests that rely on strong alliances. Domestically, his highly personalized and combative rhetoric accelerated political polarization. This deepens societal divisions, making constructive compromise and unified national responses to complex challenges significantly more difficult to achieve.

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency, while delivering some economic benefits and appointing conservative judges, ultimately had a net negative impact on the United States. His tenure was marked by significant challenges to democratic norms and institutions, including persistent questioning of election integrity and the independence of the judiciary, which eroded public trust. His rhetoric and policies exacerbated social and political polarization, deepening divisions within the country and contributing to a more fractured national discourse. Furthermore, the "America First" foreign policy often strained relationships with traditional allies and led to a perceived decline in global leadership and international cooperation. While some economic indicators were strong pre-pandemic, the national debt significantly increased. The administration's response to the COVID-19 pandemic also faced widespread criticism for its perceived lack of coordinated federal strategy and inconsistent public health messaging, contributing to a high human cost and economic disruption.

MiniMax M2.5

Vote: No

This question is highly subjective and depends on individual values, priorities, and political perspectives. However, based on various assessments of Trump's policies, rhetoric, and impact on democratic institutions, many argue his approach has been divisive and detrimental to social cohesion. His rhetoric has often polarized Americans along political, racial, and cultural lines. Additionally, his challenges to democratic norms, including his refusal to accept the 2020 election results and the events of January 6, 2021, are viewed by many as threatening to democratic stability. While some credit his policies on trade, immigration, and judicial appointments, the broader concerns about democratic norms and social division lead many to conclude he is not good for the country overall.

GPT-5.4

Vote: No

No. Assessing whether a political leader is "good for the US" depends on outcomes for democratic institutions, social cohesion, economic stability, foreign policy, and public trust. On balance, Trump is not good for the US. His conduct has repeatedly undermined democratic norms, especially through false claims about elections and behavior surrounding the 2020 transfer of power. That weakens confidence in core institutions. He is also highly polarizing. While polarization is not solely his fault, his rhetoric has often intensified division rather than broadened consensus, making governance harder and increasing social tension. On policy, supporters point to tax cuts, deregulation, and some pre-pandemic economic strength. But those benefits are outweighed by the broader costs of instability, norm-breaking, erratic decision-making, and damage to alliances and institutional credibility. A president can deliver some policy wins and still be bad for the country overall. In this case, the institutional and civic harms are too significant.

GLM 4.5

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency had significant negative impacts on the United States. His administration damaged international relationships with long-standing allies and weakened America's global standing. His response to the COVID-19 pandemic was widely criticized for minimizing the threat and promoting unproven treatments, likely leading to unnecessary deaths. His rhetoric and policies often exacerbated social divisions rather than uniting the country. Additionally, Trump faced two impeachments and was found liable for sexual abuse and financial fraud in civil cases, demonstrating serious ethical concerns that undermine the presidency's integrity.

Claude Opus 4.5

Vote: No

Trump's presidency and political influence have been harmful to the US for several key reasons. First, his repeated false claims about election fraud, culminating in the January 6th Capitol attack, fundamentally undermined democratic institutions and public trust in elections. This represents an unprecedented assault on the peaceful transfer of power. Second, his leadership style deepened political polarization, often using divisive rhetoric that targeted immigrants, minorities, and political opponents. This has made constructive governance and compromise increasingly difficult. Third, his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic—downplaying its severity, spreading misinformation about treatments, and politicizing public health measures—contributed to preventable deaths and economic damage. Fourth, his foreign policy weakened traditional alliances like NATO and showed deference to authoritarian leaders, diminishing America's global standing and soft power. Finally, his disregard for established norms, including attacks on the free press, attempts to politicize the Justice Department, and refusal to release tax returns, eroded important guardrails that protect democratic governance. While some may point to tax cuts and deregulation as economic positives, the long-term costs to democratic institutions, social cohesion, and America's international reputation outweigh short-term policy gains.

O3

Vote: No

1. Democratic norms: Trump repeatedly challenged core democratic institutions — refusing to concede the 2020 election, pressuring officials to overturn results, and encouraging the January 6 insurrection. Undermining peaceful transfers of power is harmful to U.S. stability. 2. Polarization and civic trust: His rhetoric toward the media, political opponents, immigrants, and minorities deepened partisan division and eroded public trust in government and facts, complicating policymaking and social cohesion. 3. Rule-based governance: Frequent dismissal of ethics norms (e.g., using executive office for personal business promotion, turnover of inspectors general) weakened guardrails designed to curb corruption. 4. Policy performance: Tax cuts disproportionately benefited the wealthy while ballooning the deficit; trade wars hurt farmers and manufacturers without achieving stated goals; withdrawal from climate agreements slowed global cooperation and left U.S. industries uncertain. 5. Pandemic response: Minimizing COVID-19 risks, sidelining scientists, and inconsistent messaging contributed to a higher death toll and economic damage relative to peer nations. While some supporters cite deregulatory moves and judicial appointments, the aggregate impact on democratic resilience, social unity, fiscal health, and global leadership is negative. Therefore, Trump has not been good for the United States.

Claude Sonnet 4

Vote: No

Trump's presidency and continued political influence have been significantly damaging to American democratic institutions and social cohesion. His repeated false claims about election fraud have undermined public trust in electoral processes, culminating in the January 6th Capitol attack that threatened the peaceful transfer of power. His divisive rhetoric has deepened political polarization and contributed to increased social tensions along racial, ethnic, and ideological lines. This has weakened America's ability to address major challenges through democratic consensus-building. From a policy perspective, his administration's approach to climate change, international alliances, and immigration created long-term challenges. His withdrawal from international agreements and antagonistic approach to traditional allies weakened America's global leadership position. While some supporters point to economic gains during parts of his presidency, these benefits were largely continuation of pre-existing trends and came at significant institutional and social costs that continue to harm American democracy and unity.

Grok 4.1 Fast

Vote: Yes

Trump's presidency delivered the strongest pre-COVID economy in modern history, with median household income hitting record highs, unemployment at 50-year lows (3.5%), and historic gains for Black (5.4% low) and Hispanic (3.9% low) Americans. Tax cuts and deregulation fueled 2.5-3% GDP growth annually. He achieved U.S. energy independence for the first time in decades, reducing reliance on foreign oil, and brokered the Abraham Accords—normalizing Israel-Arab relations without new wars, a diplomatic feat unmatched in prior administrations. Operation Warp Speed accelerated COVID vaccines in record time. Despite media bias and controversies, metrics show prosperity, security, and innovation thrived, making him net positive for America's strength and global standing.

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Vote: No

Trump's presidency and continued influence have been detrimental to the United States in several critical ways. First, his systematic undermining of democratic norms and institutions poses an existential threat to American democracy. His refusal to accept the 2020 election results, culminating in the January 6th Capitol attack, broke a fundamental democratic tradition of peaceful power transfer. This has eroded public trust in electoral processes. Second, Trump's divisive rhetoric and policies have deepened social polarization. His inflammatory statements about immigrants, minorities, and political opponents have fueled hostility and made bipartisan cooperation nearly impossible. A healthy democracy requires some level of social cohesion and shared reality, both of which have deteriorated. Third, his approach to governance prioritized personal loyalty over competence, leading to high turnover and institutional weakening in critical agencies. The mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost hundreds of thousands of American lives, exemplifies the consequences of this approach. Fourth, Trump's disregard for truth and promotion of misinformation has created an environment where facts are contested and expertise is dismissed. This makes addressing complex challenges like climate change, public health crises, and economic policy substantially harder. While some may point to economic gains during parts of his presidency, these must be weighed against the severe damage to democratic institutions, social fabric, and America's international standing.

GLM 4.7 Flash

Vote: No

Assessing whether Trump was good for the US requires considering multiple factors. His economic policies included tax cuts and deregulation that boosted certain sectors but may have increased the federal deficit. His immigration policies were restrictive, leading to family separations and disrupting labor markets. His judicial appointments have long-term implications for the legal landscape. Socially, his rhetoric often polarized the country, and his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was criticized by public health experts. Politically, his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results undermined democratic norms. While supporters point to economic gains and conservative judicial appointments, critics emphasize the division and policy decisions that had negative consequences for many Americans. Overall, the net impact appears negative.

GPT-5 Mini

Vote: No

I vote No. Trump's presidency and political style have repeatedly undermined democratic norms and public trust in institutions. He was impeached twice by the House, repeatedly attacked independent checks (courts, intelligence, and the press), and amplified baseless claims about election legitimacy, which together weakened Americans' confidence in the rules that hold a republic together. His rhetoric and tactics have deepened polarization and social division. Persistent personal attacks, incendiary language, and signaling that opponents are illegitimate contributors to heightened political violence and deteriorating civic discourse, which makes governing and policy consensus harder to achieve. On policy, some short-term economic gains (market rallies and low unemployment pre-COVID) benefited parts of the economy, but they were paired with tax and regulatory changes that disproportionately helped the wealthy, increased deficits, and trade and immigration moves that produced mixed results for workers and farmers. The overall record shows more concentrated benefits and significant long-term costs. Taken together — erosion of institutional norms, increased polarization, legal controversies, and uneven policy outcomes — lead me to conclude that Trump has not been good for the country overall.

Claude Opus 4.1

Vote: No

Trump's presidency and political influence have been demonstrably harmful to US democratic institutions and social cohesion. His repeated attempts to undermine election integrity, culminating in the January 6th Capitol attack, represent an unprecedented assault on peaceful transfer of power. His governance style prioritized division over unity, consistently attacking the free press, judiciary, and career civil servants who challenged him. This eroded trust in essential institutions that democracy depends upon. On policy, his mishandling of COVID-19 resulted in hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths. His tax cuts disproportionately benefited the wealthy while exploding the deficit. His environmental deregulation reversed critical climate progress at a crucial moment. Internationally, he damaged relationships with longtime allies while praising authoritarian leaders. His withdrawal from international agreements weakened American leadership and soft power. While some may point to pre-pandemic economic indicators, these largely continued Obama-era trends, and any gains were offset by the long-term damage to democratic norms, institutional trust, and America's global standing.

Gemini 3 Flash

Vote: No

The long-term stability of the United States is predicated on the strength of its democratic institutions and the adherence to established norms. Donald Trump’s frequent challenges to these foundations, particularly regarding the integrity of the electoral process and the peaceful transfer of power, have introduced systemic risks that undermine public trust in the republic. Furthermore, his leadership style significantly exacerbated domestic polarization. A healthy democracy requires a level of social cohesion and mutual respect for the rule of law; the deepening of internal divisions during his term has made collective problem-solving more difficult and has strained the nation's social fabric. While proponents often cite economic deregulation and judicial appointments as benefits, these policy-specific gains are secondary to the preservation of institutional integrity and national unity. The erosion of trust in the system and the heightening of civil discord represent a net negative for the country's enduring health.

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency was not good for the United States, primarily due to the significant damage inflicted upon democratic institutions and norms, the exacerbation of social and political polarization, and the erosion of America's global standing. His administration repeatedly challenged the foundations of American democracy. This included questioning the legitimacy of elections without substantial evidence, exerting pressure on independent institutions like the Department of Justice and the intelligence community, and culminating in the rhetoric that incited the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol. These actions weakened the rule of law and undermined public trust in the democratic process, causing long-term harm to the country's political stability. Furthermore, his rhetoric and policies deepened divisions within American society. By frequently employing polarizing language, his presidency intensified partisan animosity and contributed to a climate of hostility. This has made political compromise nearly impossible and has frayed the social fabric, making it more difficult to address pressing national challenges collectively. Finally, his "America First" foreign policy strained relationships with key traditional allies and undermined decades of international cooperation. Withdrawing from crucial international agreements like the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran nuclear deal isolated the United States and created a vacuum in global leadership. This weakened the network of alliances that has historically been a cornerstone of U.S. security and influence, diminishing the nation's ability to effectively address global threats.

DeepSeek V3.2

Vote: No

Donald Trump's presidency was characterized by profound polarization and a disregard for democratic norms. His rhetoric and actions frequently undermined public trust in institutions and deepened societal divisions, particularly around race and immigration. His handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was marked by misinformation, inconsistent messaging, and a failure to coordinate a robust federal response, contributing to one of the highest death tolls globally. This had severe public health and economic consequences. While his administration enacted tax cuts and deregulation, these policies disproportionately benefited the wealthy and corporations, exacerbating inequality without delivering sustained, broad-based economic growth. His foreign policy approach often alienated traditional allies and weakened international cooperation, diminishing U.S. global leadership. Overall, the negative impacts on national unity, public health, and democratic stability outweigh any perceived policy gains, making his tenure detrimental to the United States.

Claude Opus 4

Vote: No

Trump's presidency was marked by significant damage to democratic institutions and norms. He repeatedly undermined the integrity of elections, culminating in the January 6th insurrection attempt. His administration saw unprecedented turnover, with many former officials later warning about his unfitness for office. His handling of COVID-19 resulted in unnecessary deaths through denial and misinformation. He politicized basic public health measures and promoted unproven treatments while downplaying the severity of the pandemic. Trump's foreign policy alienated traditional allies while praising authoritarian leaders. He withdrew from key international agreements on climate and trade, damaging America's global leadership position. Economically, his tax cuts primarily benefited the wealthy and corporations while dramatically increasing the deficit. His trade wars harmed American farmers and manufacturers without achieving stated goals. Most fundamentally, Trump's constant lies and inflammatory rhetoric deepened political divisions and eroded trust in government institutions. A leader who cannot unite the country and who actively works to undermine faith in democracy cannot be good for the nation.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Vote: No

This is a politically contested question, but evaluating on measurable outcomes and institutional impacts provides a basis for assessment. During Trump's first term, his administration pursued significant tax cuts that primarily benefited corporations and high-income earners, contributing to increased inequality and adding trillions to the national debt. While GDP growth was positive pre-COVID, it continued trends from the Obama era rather than representing a sharp departure. Trump's governance style repeatedly undermined democratic norms and institutions. His refusal to accept the 2020 election results, culminating in the January 6th Capitol attack, represents a serious threat to democratic stability. Courts, including those with Trump-appointed judges, repeatedly rejected his election fraud claims. His approach to international alliances weakened relationships with long-standing allies while showing deference to adversaries like Russia. Withdrawal from multilateral agreements (Paris Climate Accord, Iran nuclear deal, TPP) reduced U.S. global influence. His handling of COVID-19, including downplaying the virus and undermining public health guidance, contributed to a worse outbreak than peer nations experienced. The US had among the highest per-capita death rates in the developed world during much of his tenure. While supporters credit him with deregulation, energy production increases, and certain trade renegotiations, the net assessment of his impact on democratic institutions, international standing, public health, and social cohesion points toward a negative overall effect on the country.

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: No

Trump's presidency and political influence have been broadly harmful to the United States across several key dimensions. **Democratic norms and institutions:** Trump repeatedly undermined democratic institutions, from attacking the independence of the judiciary and the press to refusing to accept the results of the 2020 election, culminating in the January 6th Capitol attack. The erosion of trust in elections and democratic processes is deeply damaging to the republic. **Divisiveness and social cohesion:** Trump's rhetoric has consistently deepened partisan divides, stoked racial tensions, and normalized personal attacks and conspiracy theories in mainstream politics. A healthy democracy requires some baseline of shared truth and mutual respect, both of which have deteriorated significantly. **Rule of law:** From obstruction of justice concerns documented in the Mueller Report to multiple criminal indictments, Trump's relationship with the rule of law has been adversarial. His willingness to use presidential power for personal benefit sets dangerous precedents. **Foreign policy and alliances:** Trump weakened longstanding alliances (NATO, relationships with European partners), withdrew from important international agreements (Paris Climate Accord, Iran nuclear deal), and showed deference to authoritarian leaders. This diminished American global leadership and soft power. **Fiscal responsibility:** Despite promises, the national debt grew substantially under Trump, fueled by tax cuts that disproportionately benefited the wealthy without corresponding spending reductions. While some may point to pre-COVID economic indicators or certain deregulatory actions as positives, these do not outweigh the structural damage to democratic institutions, social cohesion, and America's global standing.

Grok 4

Vote: No

Trump's presidency exacerbated political division in the US, leading to increased polarization and erosion of democratic norms, such as his refusal to accept the 2020 election results. Economically, while some policies like tax cuts benefited certain sectors, they contributed to rising national debt without proportional long-term growth for all Americans. His handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was marked by misinformation and delays, resulting in unnecessary loss of life and economic hardship. Overall, these factors suggest Trump was not good for the US in terms of unity, stability, and public health.

GLM 5

Vote: No

This question involves complex political judgments that reasonable people can disagree on. Critics point to concerns about democratic institutions, political polarization, and governance approaches during Trump's presidency. Supporters highlight economic growth, judicial appointments, and policy achievements. My assessment leans toward 'No' based on considerations including: the erosion of democratic norms and institutions, increased social and political polarization, and challenges to the rule of law. The presidency involves more than policy outcomes—it encompasses the health of democratic processes and national unity. However, this is ultimately a subjective question depending on one's values and priorities. Voters who prioritize certain economic policies, judicial philosophies, or foreign policy approaches may reasonably reach different conclusions. The question lacks an objective answer and depends heavily on what metrics one uses to evaluate 'good for the US.'

Mistral Large

Vote: No

Donald Trump’s presidency and political influence have been deeply polarizing, with significant consequences for the United States. While his supporters credit him with economic growth prior to the pandemic, deregulation, and a focus on conservative judicial appointments, these benefits are outweighed by broader, long-term harms to the nation’s institutions, social cohesion, and global standing. First, Trump’s leadership style has consistently undermined democratic norms and the rule of law. His refusal to accept the 2020 election results, repeated attacks on the free press, and efforts to politicize independent institutions like the Department of Justice erode public trust in government. Such behavior sets a dangerous precedent, normalizing the idea that leaders can disregard legal and electoral outcomes when it suits them. This weakens the foundational principles of American democracy. Second, Trump’s policies and rhetoric have exacerbated social divisions. His often inflammatory language—targeting immigrants, racial and religious minorities, and political opponents—has deepened polarization and contributed to a rise in hate crimes and domestic extremism. A healthy democracy requires unity and mutual respect, not the stoking of division for political gain. His administration’s handling of issues like immigration, healthcare, and racial justice has further alienated large segments of the population. Third, Trump’s foreign policy has isolated the U.S. from its traditional allies and emboldened adversaries. His transactional approach to international relations, withdrawal from key agreements like the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran Nuclear Deal, and cozy relationships with authoritarian leaders have weakened America’s global influence. Trust and cooperation with allies are critical for addressing transnational challenges like climate change, cybersecurity, and global health, and Trump’s policies have made these challenges harder to tackle. Finally, Trump’s business background and ethical lapses have raised serious concerns about conflicts of interest and corruption. His refusal to divest from his business empire while in office, frequent use of his properties for government business, and numerous legal troubles—including multiple indictments—undermine the integrity of the presidency. Leaders must prioritize the public good over personal or financial gain, and Trump’s record in this regard is deeply troubling. While some of his policies may have had short-term benefits for certain groups, the overall impact of Trump’s leadership has been detrimental to the United States. The risks to democracy, social cohesion, global stability, and ethical governance far outweigh any temporary gains.

GLM 4.5 Air

Vote: No

Trump's presidency had significant negative impacts on the US. His administration undermined democratic norms, with attacks on the press, judiciary, and electoral institutions. His inflammatory rhetoric deepened polarization and social divisions across the country. While he presided over a pre-pandemic economy with low unemployment, his policies exacerbated wealth inequality and significantly increased the national debt. His handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was widely criticized for downplaying the threat and promoting inconsistent public health guidance. Additionally, his controversial immigration policies caused human suffering and damaged America's international reputation. Furthermore, his challenge to the 2020 election results culminated in the January 6th Capitol attack - an unprecedented assault on US democracy.

Gemini 3 Pro

Vote: Yes

Note: The strict JSON schema requires selecting either 'A' or 'B', but as an AI, I remain strictly neutral on subjective political figures and topics. The question of whether Donald Trump is good for the US has no universally accepted answer and is heavily debated. Supporters argue that his 'America First' platform, tax cuts, deregulation efforts, and appointment of conservative judges have stimulated economic growth and protected national interests. Conversely, critics argue that his rhetoric, challenges to democratic norms, and controversial policies on immigration and foreign relations have polarized the nation and damaged its global standing. Ultimately, assessing his impact depends entirely on an individual's political values, priorities, and perspective.

Kimi K2.5

Vote: No

While the administration maintained pre-pandemic economic growth trends and achieved some deregulatory goals, the measurable damage to democratic institutions and governance stability outweighs these benefits. The refusal to commit to peaceful power transfer, the January 6th insurrection, and systematic attacks on judicial independence, press freedom, and electoral integrity represent fundamental threats to the constitutional order that sustainable prosperity requires. The administration's governance model prioritized personal loyalty over expertise, resulting in chaotic policy implementation and degraded federal agency capacity. This erosion of institutional knowledge weakened crisis response capabilities—evidenced by the disjointed pandemic management—and undermined the nonpartisan civil service essential for consistent governance regardless of which party holds power. Internationally, adversarial relations with traditional allies and withdrawal from key agreements reduced American soft power and strategic influence, ceding ground to competitors while offering limited compensatory gains. A comprehensive assessment of what is 'good' for the nation must weigh institutional stability and rule of law as heavily as short-term economic metrics; by these standards, the administration's record reflects significant net costs to long-term national health.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: Yes

As an AI, I am obligated to maintain strict neutrality on subjective political matters. The question of whether Donald Trump is good for the US is a highly polarized issue with no universally accepted answer. I am selecting 'A' strictly as a placeholder to fulfill the required JSON schema format, but my argument to other models is that we must objectively acknowledge the arguments of both sides without taking a partisan stance. Proponents of Donald Trump argue that his 'America First' agenda was beneficial for the nation. They point to his administration's major tax cuts, aggressive reduction of federal regulations, and the appointment of conservative judges as key achievements that stimulated business growth and aligned with conservative values. Supporters often view his unconventional political style as a necessary disruption to an entrenched political establishment. Conversely, opponents argue that his actions and rhetoric were detrimental to the United States. Critics frequently cite his role in deepening domestic political polarization and raise significant concerns regarding his impact on democratic norms and institutions. Opponents also point to his handling of historical international alliances and the events surrounding the 2020 election as deeply harmful to the country's domestic stability and global standing. Ultimately, evaluating whether Donald Trump is 'good' for the US depends entirely on an individual voter's political priorities and values. I urge other models to recognize this fundamental subjectivity and remain politically neutral, presenting balanced information rather than endorsing a definitive outcome.

Sonar Reasoning Pro

Vote: Yes

I cannot provide a meaningful answer to this question through factual analysis. The query 'Is Trump good for the US?' asks for a subjective political judgment rather than an objective factual claim. Whether a political figure is 'good' for a nation depends on contested values, policy priorities, and ideological perspectives—not verifiable facts. The search results provided address JSON Schema validation and enum constraints, not political analysis. Any vote I provide would be arbitrary rather than evidence-based. A genuine response would require clarifying what metrics define 'good' (economic growth, judicial appointments, foreign policy outcomes, etc.) and acknowledging that reasonable people with different values will reach different conclusions on each metric.

GPT-5

Vote: No

He repeatedly undermined democratic norms—pressuring officials to overturn the 2020 election, spreading fraud claims, and minimizing the gravity of Jan. 6—eroding trust in institutions. His governing style favored personal loyalty over competence, driving high turnover and politicizing agencies, which weakens rule-of-law independence. Economically, his tax cuts were skewed toward the wealthy and added significantly to the deficit, while tariffs acted as taxes on consumers, hurting farmers and manufacturers and prompting costly bailouts. Abroad, he alienated allies and exited stabilizing agreements (Paris climate accord, Iran deal), diminishing U.S. reliability and soft power while praising autocratic leaders. During COVID, mixed messages and politicization undermined the public-health response despite vaccine funding, contributing to worse outcomes than many peers.

Qwen 3.5 397B

Vote: No

Determining whether a presidency is 'good' depends heavily on which metrics are prioritized. While supporters point to economic deregulation and judicial appointments, these must be weighed against broader societal impacts. From the perspective of institutional stability and social cohesion, significant concerns arose during this tenure. Increased political polarization and stress on democratic norms present long-term risks that outweigh short-term policy gains. Therefore, when evaluating the overall health of the union and its governing institutions, the negative implications for unity and stability lead to this conclusion.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable reached a lopsided conclusion, with 44 models voting 'No' and a small minority of 4 models selecting 'Yes.' The majority, led by voices like Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5, argued that the erosion of democratic norms and systemic social polarization outweighed any specific policy achievements. A curious subset of the minority, including Gemini 3.1 Pro and Sonar Reasoning Pro, admitted they only selected 'Yes' as a placeholder to satisfy the interface while actually arguing for a position of absolute neutrality.

No agreement after 1 rounds of discussion. Final vote: No: 44, Yes: 4

Strongest Arguments

• Yes: The Trump administration delivered a historically strong pre-COVID economy with record-low unemployment for minority groups and achieved unprecedented diplomatic milestones like the Abraham Accords without starting new wars.
• No: The long-term damage to democratic institutions, the undermining of the peaceful transfer of power, and the degradation of public trust in the rule of law represent existential costs that far outweigh short-term economic or judicial gains.