Awesome.
(A) is out of scope, indeed.
(B) is almost a premise booster because the stimulus states Rosé was #1 in the previous year,
so it's anyone's guess who #2 is, but true, that part is, on the whole, irrelevant.
(C) is definitely a strengthener.
(D) is our guy/gal!
(E) causes one to assume too much (will her principal kick her off the poll because his Ferrari got rekt?),
which is never a good way to look for a weakener; if it weakens, it does so and should be "straightforward."
(D) is correct because if actual analysis has been conducted to indicate that one's popularity can drop upon entering senior year,
we have reason to believe that, even though Rosé was super likable back in the day, Rosé will just lose some of that fame someday,
enough to make someone else become more popular than her,
someone (and this is a bit of a stretch) who was never that popular to begin with to skyrocket in popularity (wow, what a run-on).
The original assumption is that, since Rosé kept winning, she will stay winning, and that SUPPORT is what we ought to weaken,
NOT the premise, the FACT that Rosé had really won all those years, OR the conclusion, the outcome that is being supported.
By damaging the building blocks (support), the house (conclusion) will deteriorate and may even fall apart altogether.
We're not entirely convinced that Rosé won't still be #1, but there is now at least a shred of doubt. That's my weaken thought process.
TLDR; overall, even though it's just one problem to confirm my earlier suspicions,
I think you're on the right track, and it could be outside factors, like work, that are causing you to lag.
Drilling is great, but it's not a means to an end. Eventually, you're just gonna have to retain the way you operate the way surgeons do.
You're sitting in December, yes? Best of luck to you!