News
US President-Elect, Joseph R. Biden Jr, Shaped By Tragedy, Tradition
Thirty-three years ago, he was the fast-talking junior senator from Delaware with a chip on his shoulder, desperate to prove his gravitas during a brief, ill-fated presidential run.
The next time around, in 2008, he was the seasoned foreign policy hand and veteran lawmaker who strained to capture the imagination of Democratic presidential primary voters.
As he weighed a third attempt at the presidency last year, many Democrats feared he was too late. Too old, too moderate, too meandering to excite ascendant voices in his party, too rooted in the more civil politics of the past to nimbly handle Donald Trump.
Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. ran anyway. He ran as a grieving father who connected with a country in pain. As a relative centrist who emphasized character, stability and belief in bipartisanship over the particulars of a policy agenda. As a flawed, uneven campaigner whose vulnerabilities were ultimately drowned out by his opponent’s outsize weaknesses, and eclipsed by the seismic issues at stake, as the nation confronted the ravages of a deadly pandemic.
In many ways, he ran as the politician he has always been. And for one extraordinary election, that was enough.
“They’re not so much saying, ‘I’m investing in Joe Biden because of his philosophy,’” said former Senator William S. Cohen, Republican of Maine, who served with Mr. Biden and supported him this year. “They’re invested in Joe Biden because of him, of who they see as being a human being.”
Mr. Biden’s victory on Saturday is the culmination of a career that began in the Nixon era and spanned a half-century of political and social upheaval. But if the country, the political parties and Washington have changed since Mr. Biden, now 77, arrived in the Senate as a 30-year-old widower in 1973, some of his attitudes — about governing and about his fellow Americans — have hardly changed at all.
He still reveres institutions, defiantly champions compromise and sees politics more in terms of relationships than ideology. He has insisted that with Mr. Trump out of office, Republicans will have an “epiphany” about working with Democrats — a view that elides the fact that Republicans were rarely interested in working with the Obama administration when Mr. Biden was vice president.
Those beliefs, coupled with his reputation as an empathetic and experienced leader, made Mr. Biden acceptable to a broad coalition of Americans this year, including independents and some moderate Republicans.
Now, Mr. Biden’s convictions about how to unite the country and move forward will be tested as never before.
He will take the helm of a nation devastated by a health crisis, reeling from an economic downturn and divided over virtually every major political matter of the day, from how and even whether to confront climate change and racial injustice, to baseless questions from some of Mr. Trump’s supporters about the very legitimacy of free and fair election results.
His first priority, Mr. Biden has said, will be to bring the coronavirus under control, as he also works to invest in infrastructure and to promote economic growth. Mr. Biden has released a series of policy plans around all of those issues, and has made clear that a national emergency calls for urgent and ambitious action.
But the president-elect, a 36-year veteran of the Senate who has never embraced the most far-reaching progressive proposals, is also well aware that the partisan makeup of Washington may limit the scope of his agenda. He is unlikely to press for rapid, transformational change of institutions like the Supreme Court or to embrace the boldest proposals in the Green New Deal.
Yet for all of his instincts for consensus-building, he will face enormous and conflicting pressures when he returns to Washington.
Progressives who papered over their differences with Mr. Biden in the name of defeating Mr. Trump will quickly turn to fighting for their priorities, which may not always align with Mr. Biden’s goals or timeline.
“Where the progressive energy will really turn angry is if we see Biden really compromising on core principles,” warned Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, a co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Even his closest allies believe there are elements of his long record that should be reconsidered from the White House, including the legacy of the crime bills passed during his tenure in the Senate. Mr. Biden for years served as a tough-on-crime Democrat, and he has sometimes struggled to account for his leading role in the 1994 crime bill, which many experts now associate with mass incarceration.
“He needs to put together a commission or a committee to study the 1986 and 1994 crime bills,” said Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the highest-ranking Black official in Congress, describing mass incarceration as an unintended consequence. “We’ve got to rectify.”
And Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the powerful Republican leader, has a relationship with Mr. Biden — but he is unlikely to be moved by encomiums to bipartisanship and civility.
“Joe is a peacemaker — he’s always tried to get along with Republicans,” said Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat and the former Senate majority leader.
But he was skeptical that Republican leaders in Congress would feel similarly about curbing divisiveness in Washington.
“I just hope Joe’s right and I’m wrong,” he said, “but I don’t see that coming to an end.”
Mr. Biden was a mediocre student with big ambitions, a gregarious young football player from an Irish Catholic family who overcame a stutter and dreamed of running for president.
In the meantime, he settled for school politics, serving as class president at his Catholic high school and adopting an approachable manner that he would deploy decades later on the campaign trail.
“The joke was, if Joe stood next to a light pole, he’d strike up a conversation,” said Bob Markel, a childhood friend of Mr. Biden’s. “You were talking to him for 20 seconds, he’d put out his hand and say, ‘Joe Biden.’”
He came from a line of politically engaged Pennsylvanians on his mother’s side, with a great-grandfather who served as a state senator. His father was a dignified man who had struggled financially, “a student of history with an unyielding sense of justice,” Mr. Biden said in his eulogy. Joseph R. Biden Sr., who moved the family from Scranton, Pa., to Delaware when Mr. Biden was 10, shaped his son’s moral compass and instilled in him a strong sense of identity; his story looms large in Mr. Biden’s efforts today to connect with working-class Americans.
Mr. Biden enrolled at the University of Delaware, where he threw himself into politics as freshman class president. He participated in the occasional high jinks, though even then he was fairly conservative in his personal manner.
“It’s the same style that I think we’ve seen since he was a teenager,” Mr. Markel said. “That moderation can be seen when he was in his teens. He was a fun-loving guy, certainly outgoing, but he didn’t do crazy things.”
For all of his political ambitions, he was at a remove from the antiwar activism taking hold among his peers in the caldron of the 1960s, and he was not one for protesting. After graduating from law school, he followed a path into institutional Democratic politics: young lawyer, part-time public defender and rising star within the Delaware party establishment.
At the end of that decade, party elders suggested he try his hand at a seat on the New Castle County Council.
“I spent most of my time in heavily Democratic precincts,” Mr. Biden recalled, describing the race in a memoir. “But I also spent a great deal of time going door to door in the middle-class neighborhoods like the one I grew up in. They were overwhelmingly Republican in 1970, but I knew how to talk to them.”
At the age of 30, Mr. Biden was moving swiftly in his political career. But personally, he was a broken man.
In a day, he had gone from a married father of three who won a startling victory in the 1972 Senate race to a widower with two toddlers in the hospital after a car crash killed his wife, Neilia, and their baby daughter, Naomi.
For months, he struggled to adjust to the Senate job he had wanted so badly.
Decades later, one of his surviving sons, Beau, would die of brain cancer. Mr. Biden, by then vice president, would be shattered anew.
Yet those staggering personal losses, friends say, shaped Mr. Biden’s uncommon ability to empathize — perhaps his greatest strength.
On the campaign trail, he never spoke with deeper authority than when he promised a grieving voter that one day, the memory of a loved one would bring a smile before a tear. His skill at connecting with voters in pain, allies say, uniquely prepared him to run for president amid a pandemic that has killed more than 237,000 people in the United States and upended the lives of many others on Mr. Trump’s watch.
“He understood the emotional trauma that Trump has inflicted on the country in a way that most of the other candidates didn’t,” said Shailagh Murray, who was a top aide to Mr. Biden as vice president.
After the 1972 accident, Mr. Biden slowly began rebuilding his life, later marrying Jill Jacobs and having a daughter, Ashley.
And eventually, he settled into Washington, too, where his early instincts for bipartisanship and working within the system were reinforced by mentors like Mike Mansfield, the longtime Senate majority leader.
Mr. Biden rose to lead the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee. He advanced signature policy achievements like the Violence Against Women Act and an assault weapons ban, and he developed relationships with leaders around the world. He torpedoed the nomination of Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court, a setback that some Republicans remain bitter about to this day, and championed the confirmation of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
His tenure in the Senate is also associated with what many Americans see as the mistreatment of Anita Hill before his committee during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Clarence Thomas; with his vote for the Iraq war and his opposition to busing; and with his leading efforts on the 1994 crime bill that troubled some voters throughout the campaign.
As he navigated Congress, Mr. Biden built relationships with similarly consensus-minded Republicans like Senators Bob Dole, Arlen Specter and John McCain.
But Mr. Biden, who has said he was motivated to run for office in part by a belief in civil rights, was also willing to work with even the most virulent segregationist senators. And perhaps, the most controversial speech he has given was his eulogy for Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina.
“At least there was some civility,” Mr. Biden said at a fund-raiser in June 2019, citing James O. Eastland of Mississippi and Herman E. Talmadge of Georgia. “We didn’t agree on much of anything. We got things done.”
Under fire, Mr. Biden ultimately expressed regret for the way he invoked segregationist former colleagues.
He did not apologize for the instinct.
The stature Mr. Biden gained in the Senate did not always translate on the presidential campaign trail.
His 1988 race ended in humiliation amid a plagiarism controversy.
In 2008, Mr. Biden struggled to stand out in a talented and crowded field that included Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. He dropped out after Iowa, after cementing his reputation for verbal gaffes by referring to Mr. Obama as “articulate and bright and clean.”
But as Mr. Obama’s vice president, Mr. Biden was in many ways back in his element.
“Every time we had a trouble in the administration, who got sent to the Hill to settle it? Me,” Mr. Biden said at that 2019 fund-raiser. “Because I demonstrate respect for them.”
Sometimes that approach got him results — he helped secure three Republican votes for the economic stimulus bill in 2009, for example.
On other occasions — including a major gun control effort after the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut — it ultimately did not.
Mr. Biden, like many of his fellow Democrats, was enraged by the Trump presidency and fearful about the corrosive effects of four more years of extraordinary divisiveness.
But he was also closely attuned to moderate, older Black primary voters and had carefully followed which Democrats won in the toughest districts in the 2018 midterm elections. As Mr. Biden mulled a third presidential bid, he was skeptical of tacking far to the left in response to Mr. Trump and his Republican allies. And he was convinced, based on his own experiences, that he could help find common ground.
“Through very difficult periods in the country’s history, he believes he has been able to bring people together,” said Mike Donilon, Mr. Biden’s chief strategist, citing the 2009 stimulus bill and his efforts on a sweeping health measure at the end of 2016. “Beyond the politics, there are also just fundamental judgments about how to treat people, how to talk to them.”
Throughout his campaign, Mr. Biden has championed that approach, sometimes with a touch of performative defensiveness.
“We need to revive the spirit of bipartisanship in this country,” he said in a speech in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, last month. “I’m accused of being naïve. I’m told, ‘Maybe, that’s the way things used to work, Joe, but they can’t work that way anymore.’”
“They can and they must if we’re going to get anything done,” he said.
Mr. Biden, of course, has a policy agenda too, one that he has addressed often in recent months.
He ran on a platform of expanding health care access through a public option, and promoting the middle class. He promised to tackle climate change and to combat racial injustice, acknowledging that America has “never lived up” to the promise that all Americans are created equal. After the pandemic hit, he grew increasingly open to more ambitious social and economic proposals.
But more than anything, he ran as himself, with all of the convictions and the flaws he has displayed over a half-century in public life.
There were the exaggerations and verbal blunders and the flashes of temper. He lost the first three contests, and his campaign was practically moribund when Black voters in South Carolina, who saw him as a familiar and reassuring figure in troubled times, rescued his bid.
“We know Joe,” Mr. Clyburn said as he endorsed Mr. Biden. “But most importantly, Joe knows us.”
And through those peaks and valleys, Mr. Biden hewed to one consistent message: that the turmoil of the Trump era was an existential threat to the character of the country — and that he was uniquely equipped to lower the nation’s temperature and try to bring the country together.
“Has the heart of this nation turned to stone?” Mr. Biden said recently, speaking in Warm Springs, Georgia. “I refuse to believe it. I know this country. I know our people. And I know we can unite and heal this nation.”
In some ways, it is a promise he has been preparing to make for his whole career.
This time around, a majority of American voters decided to believe him.
News
Military Shake-Up: NAF Redeploys Senior Officers, Appoints New Commanders
The Nigerian Air Force has approved a major shake-up of its senior leadership, involving fresh appointments and postings across its operational commands, strategic institutions and Defence Headquarters.
The exercise, approved by the Chief of the Air Staff, Air Marshal Sunday Aneke, on November 7, 2026, is aimed at strengthening command effectiveness, enhancing institutional capacity and sustaining operational readiness.
In a statement yesterday, the Director of Public Relations and Information, NAF, Air Commodore Ehimen Ejodame, said the appointments covered Service Headquarters, operational commands, training institutions and other strategic establishments.
The statement partly read, “The NAF has approved a major strategic realignment of its senior leadership through a fresh round of postings and appointments designed to strengthen command effectiveness, enhance institutional capacity and sustain operational readiness in support of national security objectives.
“The exercise, approved by the Chief of the Air Staff, Air Marshal Sunday Kelvin Aneke, on 7 November 2026, takes effect from November 2026.
“The appointments span Service Headquarters, operational commands, Defence Headquarters, training institutions and other strategic establishments, reflecting a deliberate effort to align leadership competencies and professional experience with the Service’s evolving operational and institutional priorities.”
At the NAF Headquarters, Air Vice Marshal AK Ademuwagun was appointed Chief of Transformation and Innovation, while AVM IV Ajiboye became Superintendent of Standards and Evaluation.
Other appointments include AVM PN Amadi as Chief of Air Intelligence; AVM NN Ananaba as Chief of Operations; AVM AH Bakari as Air Provost Marshal; AVM EE Efiom as Chief of Training; and AVM AJ Laoye as Chief of Aircraft Engineering.
The Air Force also appointed AVM NI Ilo as Air Officer Commanding, Tactical Air Command; AVM BR Mamman as AOC, Mobility Command; AVM OS Ogunsina as AOC, Logistics Command; AVM MN Onyebashi as AOC, Special Operations Command; and AVM FCS Nwakara as AOC, Ground Training Command.
At the institutional level, AVM PB Philips was appointed Commandant of the Armed Forces Command and Staff College, while AVM MC Ekwueme became Commandant of the Armed Forces Resettlement Centre.
Similarly, AVM AO Akinbunwa was appointed Commandant of the Air Force War College, while AVM OC Ubadike became Commandant of the Air Force Institute of Technology.
Other appointments include AVM AI Sambo as Commandant of the Nigerian Air Force College of Logistics and Management, and AVM M Yusuf as Deputy Commandant of the Nigerian Defence Academy.
At the Defence Headquarters, AVM UK Abdullahi was appointed Director of Defence Operations, while AVM EOE Ebiowe was posted to the Office of the National Security Adviser as Deputy Coordinator, National Intelligence.
Also, AVM DDG Pwajok was appointed Director of Technical Services at the Defence Intelligence Agency, while AVM I Sani became Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence.
Other senior officers were posted to various directorates at the Defence Headquarters, including operations, military strategy, cyber operations, civil-military relations, search and rescue, special duties and joint warfare doctrine.
The appointments also affected the Defence Space Administration, where AVM AA Suleh was named Deputy Chief, while AVM OA Oyename and AVM SS Lazarus were appointed Directors of Earth Observation and Launch Vehicles and Space Operations, respectively.
Furthermore, AVM GI Jibia was appointed Deputy Force Commander of Operation Hadin Kai, while AVM JI Ukeh became Commander of the Nigerian Air Defence Corps.
The statement said the exercise was part of efforts to strengthen leadership renewal, institutional accountability and operational effectiveness across the service.
According to the CAS, the professional competence and wealth of experience of the newly appointed officers would advance his command philosophy and strengthen the Air Force’s capacity to deliver decisive airpower effects in support of joint operations and national security objectives.
“All affected officers are expected to assume their new appointments and complete the necessary handover and takeover formalities on or before November 13, 2026,” the statement concluded.
News
SERAP Demands Details Of FG’s N50,000 Relief Payments
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged the Federal Government to disclose details of the funding, implementation and administration of its N50,000 National Emergency Relief and Stabilisation Intervention.
The organisation asked the Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Reduction, Dr Bernard Doro, to provide information on beneficiary selection, payments, contracts with digital financial service providers and safeguards against political interference.
SERAP made the demand in a Freedom of Information request dated November 7, 2026, and signed by its Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare.
The request followed the ministry’s October 30 announcement of the NERSI programme, which is intended to provide N50,000 in financial assistance to vulnerable Nigerians.
SERAP said important questions remained unanswered about the programme’s total funding, geographical coverage, duration and the methodology for selecting beneficiaries from the National Social Register and verified national identity records.
It urged the minister to disclose budgetary allocations, funds released and expended, eligibility criteria, beneficiary verification processes and the geographical distribution of recipients.
The organisation also asked the ministry to clarify whether the N50,000 assistance was a one-off payment or a monthly intervention, noting that the ministry’s public statement described it as a monthly payment, while a subsequent frequently asked questions document did not clearly specify the frequency or duration.
In the request, SERAP said, “Nigerians have a right to know how public funds allocated to NERSI are being spent, who is receiving the assistance, how beneficiaries are selected and whether the programme is reaching those most in need.”
The organisation raised concerns about possible political interference in the programme, particularly ahead of the 2027 general elections.
“Publicly funded social assistance must be allocated strictly on the basis of genuine need and objective eligibility criteria. It must not be used to reward political supporters, secure partisan loyalty, finance political mobilisation or influence the electoral choices of vulnerable Nigerians, particularly ahead of the 2027 general elections,” it said.
SERAP further insisted that beneficiaries should not be required to attend political rallies, support candidates or display political materials as a condition for receiving the assistance.
“Beneficiaries must not be required or encouraged to attend political rallies, support political parties or candidates, display political materials or demonstrate political loyalty as a condition for receiving assistance. NERSI is a government programme funded with public resources, not a personal gift or political benefit from any office-holder or political party,” the organisation stated.
It also urged the minister to publicly invite the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to monitor the programme’s implementation and expenditure, investigate allegations of corruption and help ensure that funds reach intended beneficiaries.
SERAP expressed concern over reports that some Nigerians who received notifications of the N50,000 assistance had been unable to access or withdraw the funds, while others reportedly received messages indicating that they were ineligible.
“These reports raise questions about the accuracy of beneficiary verification, the reliability of payment arrangements and the effectiveness of mechanisms for resolving failed or disputed payments,” it said.
The organisation urged the ministry to investigate the complaints, publish its findings and ensure that all eligible beneficiaries received the assistance.
It also asked the government to disclose agreements with the digital financial service providers engaged to administer the payments, including ALAT, MoMo PSB, NairaGram, OPay and Moniepoint.
SERAP requested details of the providers’ roles, fees and performance, as well as information on how beneficiaries’ personal data would be protected.
“The use of the National Social Register and national identity records to identify beneficiaries must be governed by clear rules and appropriate data-protection safeguards. The Ministry should disclose how these records are being used and ensure that beneficiaries’ personal information is protected, while making anonymised and aggregated information available for public scrutiny,” it said.
The group further asked the ministry to publish anonymised information showing the number of beneficiaries and the amounts paid or scheduled for payment in each state and local government area.
It also sought records of any involvement of political actors in beneficiary selection, payments, access to beneficiary databases and the use of public resources to promote the programme.
To strengthen accountability, SERAP cited concerns raised by the Auditor-General of the Federation in the 2024 Annual Report regarding more than N78.8bn in public funds allegedly diverted or unaccounted for in the administration of social intervention and cash transfer programmes.
It also referred to concerns over N33.751bn in cash transfers made in 2023 for which relevant REMITA records and other supporting documents were reportedly not provided for audit.
“These findings underscore the importance of adequate financial controls, proper record-keeping, independent verification and effective oversight from the outset of the new intervention,” SERAP said.
The organisation said the information requested would enable Nigerians to assess whether the programme was reaching eligible beneficiaries and whether public funds were being properly accounted for.
It added, “Disclosure would also strengthen public confidence in social protection programmes and help ensure that resources intended for vulnerable Nigerians are used for their intended purposes.”
SERAP gave the minister seven days from receipt or publication of the letter to provide the requested information and take the proposed measures.
It warned that it would consider legal action to compel the ministry and other relevant authorities to fulfil their constitutional and statutory obligations if they failed to respond within the stipulated period.
News
Tinubu Didn’t Borrow ?120trn In Three Years, Presidency Replies Opposition
The Presidency has dismissed as misleading claims that President Bola Tinubu borrowed ?120 trillion in just three years while also removing the fuel subsidy.
In a statement posted on X yesterday, Special Assistant to the President on Social Media, Dada Olusegun, described the figures as the product of “Opposition’s propaganda machines.”
He said the claim that 16 past Nigerian leaders borrowed a combined ?46 trillion over 63 years, while Tinubu borrowed ?120 trillion in three years, does not reflect the full picture.
“Opposition’s propaganda machines claim that in 63 years, 16 past Nigerian leaders borrowed ?46 trillion combined, while President Tinubu borrowed ?120 trillion in just 3 years and still removed the fuel subsidy.
“But in reality, the ?46 trillion figure from late 2022 hid ?22.7 trillion in Central Bank ‘Ways and Means’ overdrafts that weren’t officially put on the books until May 2023,” Olusegun stated.
He added that earlier calculations converted foreign debt using an artificial exchange rate of ?448 to $1, when the street value was over ?700.
“When the exchange rate was unified in June 2023, the exact same dollar debt instantly looked ?13.4 trillion larger on paper overnight without a single new dollar being borrowed.”
In actual dollar terms, he said, Nigeria’s public debt rose from $113.4 billion in June 2023 to $120.9 billion by June 2026 — an increase of only $7.5 billion.
On the fuel subsidy, Olusegun noted that its removal had boosted monthly Federation Account Allocation Committee funds shared to states and local governments from ?656 billion in April 2023 to ?2.4 trillion by September 2026.
The claims being rebutted originated from a viral social media graphic that compared cumulative borrowing under previous administrations with the Tinubu government’s record and highlighted the subsidy removal.
Fact-checkers have described the graphic as misleading because the ?46 trillion figure represented outstanding debt at the end of 2022 rather than total borrowing by 16 leaders over 63 years, and because it did not adequately account for exchange-rate effects or the formal recognition of previously off-book obligations.
Nigeria’s total public debt stood at approximately ?87.38 trillion (about $113.4 billion) in June 2023, shortly after Tinubu took office.
By June 2026 it had risen to about ?166.79 trillion ($120.93 billion), according to Debt Management Office figures.
A large part of the naira increase stemmed from the 2023 naira float and the securitisation of Ways and Means advances inherited from the previous administration.
The latest rebuttal comes after Tinubu asked the Senate to approve the implementation of a $7.7bn external borrowing plan to part-finance the 2026 budget deficit.
The request, which translates to about N10.79tn at the budget exchange rate of N1,400 to the dollar, was conveyed in a letter read by the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, during Wednesday’s plenary.
The request replaced an earlier approval for $20.52bn and €1.045bn borrowings that the President had asked the Senate and the House of Representatives for a week earlier.
However, opposition parties, including the Nigeria Democratic Congress, criticized the request, citing concerns about the country’s rising debt burden and its implications for future generations.
-
Politics2 days agoLG CITY BOY COORDINATOR HAILS WIKE’S SUPPORT FOR ONYESOH, TINUBU
-
Politics2 days ago
DIRI INAUGURATES APC CAMPAIGN COUNCIL, SETS MILLION VOTES TARGET FOR TINUBU
-
Politics2 days agoNDC Candidate Urges Oborevwori To Probe Asaba Political Violence
-
News3 days agoArmy Recovers X Account After Hack Attempt
-
Business2 days agoNigeria Loses N17tr Yearly To Abandoned Projects
-
Politics2 days ago
2027: Oborevwori Tasks Media On Fair, Accurate Reporting
-
Politics2 days ago
2027: AKPABIO ENVISAGES TINUBU’S VICTORY IN SOUTH SOUTH REGION
-
Politics2 days ago
Asaba Political Violence: Police Confirm One Dead, Delta Govt Urges Probe
