Connect with us

News

Biden Wins Presidency, Ending Four Tumultuous Years Under Trump

Published

on

Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was elected the 46th president of the United States on Saturday, promising to restore political normalcy and a spirit of national unity to confront raging health and economic crises, and making Donald J. Trump a one-term president after four years of tumult in the White House.
Mr. Biden’s victory amounted to a repudiation of Mr. Trump by millions of voters exhausted with his divisive conduct and chaotic administration, and was delivered by an unlikely alliance of women, people of colour, old and young voters and a sliver of disaffected Republicans. Mr. Trump is only the third elected president since World War II to lose re-election, and the first in more than a quarter-century.
The result also provided a history-making moment for Mr. Biden’s running mate, Senator Kamala Harris of California, who will become the first woman to serve as vice president.
With his triumph, Mr. Biden, who turns 78 later this month, fulfilled his decades-long ambition in his third bid for the White House, becoming the oldest person elected president. A pillar of Washington who was first elected amid the Watergate scandal, and who prefers political consensus over combat, Mr. Biden will lead a nation and a Democratic Party that have become far more ideological since his arrival in the capital in 1973.
He offered a mainstream Democratic agenda, yet it was less his policy platform than his biography to which many voters gravitated. Seeking the nation’s highest office a half-century after his first campaign, Mr. Biden — a candidate in the late autumn of his career — presented his life of setback and recovery to voters as a parable for a wounded country.
In a brief statement issued after Pennsylvania delivered the crucial electoral votes for victory, Mr. Biden called for healing and unity. “With the campaign over, it’s time to put the anger and the harsh rhetoric behind us and come together as a nation,” he said. “It’s time for America to unite. And to heal. We are the United States of America. And there’s nothing we can’t do, if we do it together.” Mr. Biden planned to address the nation Saturday night.
In his own statement, Mr. Trump insisted “this election is far from over” and vowed that his campaign would “start prosecuting our case in court” but offered no details.
Mr. Biden’s victory, which came 48 years to the day after he was first elected to the United States Senate, set off jubilant celebrations in Democratic-leaning cities. In Washington, where Mr. Trump was despised by the city’s liberal residents, people streamed into the streets near the White House and cheered as cars bearing American flags drove by honking.
The race, which concluded after four tense days of vote-counting in a handful of battlegrounds, was a singular referendum on Mr. Trump in a way no president’s re-election has been in modern times. He coveted the attention, and voters who either adored him or loathed him were eager to render judgment on his tenure. From the beginning to the end of the race, Mr. Biden made the president’s character central to his campaign.
This unrelenting focus propelled Mr. Biden to victory in historically Democratic strongholds in the industrial Midwest with Mr. Biden forging a coalition of suburbanites and big-city residents to claim at least three states his party lost in 2016. With ballots still being counted in several states, Mr. Biden was leading Mr. Trump in the popular vote by more than four million votes.
Yet even as they turned Mr. Trump out of office, voters sent a more uncertain message about the left-of-centre platform Mr. Biden ran on as Democrats lost seats in the House and made only modest gains in the Senate. The divided judgment — a rare example of ticket splitting in partisan times — demonstrated that, for many voters, their disdain for the president was as personal as it was political.
Even in defeat, though, Mr. Trump demonstrated his enduring appeal to many white voters and his intense popularity in rural areas, underscoring the deep national divisions that Mr. Biden has vowed to heal.
The outcome of the race came into focus slowly as states and municipalities grappled with the legal and logistical challenges of voting in the midst of the Coronavirus pandemic. With an enormous backlog of early and mail-in votes, some states reported their totals in a halting fashion that in the early hours of Wednesday painted a misleadingly rosy picture for Mr. Trump.
But as the big cities of the Midwest and West began to report their totals, the advantage in the race shifted the electoral map in Mr. Biden’s favour. By Wednesday afternoon, the former vice president had rebuilt much of the so-called blue wall in the Midwest, reclaiming the historically Democratic battlegrounds of Wisconsin and Michigan that Mr. Trump carried four years ago. And on Saturday, with troves of ballots coming in from Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, he took back Pennsylvania as well. As if that was not enough, Biden also won Nevada, with its 6 Electoral College votes, on Saturday.
While Mr. Biden stopped short of claiming victory as the week unfolded, he appeared several times in his home state, Delaware, to express confidence that he could win, while urging patience as the nation awaited the results. Even as he sought to claim something of an electoral mandate, noting that he had earned more in the popular vote than any other candidate in history, Mr. Biden struck a tone of reconciliation.
It would soon be time, he said, “to unite, to heal, to come together as a nation.”
In the days after the election, Mr. Biden and his party faced a barrage of attacks from Mr. Trump. The president falsely claimed in a middle-of-the-night appearance at the White House on Wednesday that he had won the race and that Democrats were conjuring fraudulent votes to undermine him, a theme he renewed on Thursday evening in grievance-filled remarks conjuring up, with no evidence, a conspiracy to steal votes from him.
The president’s campaign aides adopted a tone of brash defiance as swing states fell to Mr. Biden, promising a flurry of legal action. But while Mr. Trump’s ire had the potential to foment political divisions, there was no indication that he could succeed with his seemingly improvisational legal strategy.
Through it all, the Coronavirus and its ravages on the country hung over the election and shaped the choice for voters. Facing an electorate already fatigued by his aberrant conduct, the president effectively sealed his defeat by minimizing a pandemic that has created simultaneous health and economic crises.
Beginning with the outbreak of the virus in the country at the start of the year, through his own diagnosis last month and up to the last hours of the election, he disregarded his medical advisers and public opinion even as over 230,000 people in the United States perished.
Mr. Biden, by contrast, sought to channel the dismay of those appalled by Mr. Trump’s mismanagement of the pandemic. He offered himself as a safe harbour for a broad array of Americans, promising to guide the nation out of what he called the “dark winter” of the outbreak, rather than delivering a visionary message with bright ideological themes.
While the president ridiculed mask-wearing and insisted on continuing his large rallies, endangering his own staff members and supporters, Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris campaigned with caution, avoiding indoor events, insisting on social distancing and always wearing masks.
Convinced that he could win back the industrial Northern states that swung to Mr. Trump four years ago, Mr. Biden focused his energy on Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Mr. Biden triumphed in those states on the strength of overwhelming support from women, who voted in large numbers to repudiate Mr. Trump despite his last-minute pleas to “suburban housewives,” as he called them.
Many of the women who decided the president’s fate were politically moderate college-educated suburbanites, who made their presence felt as an electoral force first in the 2018 midterm elections, when a historic wave of female candidates and voters served as the driving force behind the Democratic sweep to power in the House.
Even aside from the pandemic, the 2020 campaign unfolded against a backdrop of national tumult unequalled in recent history, including the House’s vote to impeach the president less than a year ago, a national wave of protests over racial injustice last spring, spasms of civil unrest throughout the summer, the death of a Supreme Court justice in September and the hospitalization of Mr. Trump in October.
Along the way, Mr. Trump played to his conservative base, seeking to divide the nation over race and cultural flash points. He encouraged those fears, and the underlying social divisions that fostered them. And for months he sought to sow doubt over the legitimacy of the political process.
Mr. Biden, in response, offered a message of healing that appealed to Americans from far left to centre right. He made common cause by promising relief from the unceasing invective and dishonesty of Mr. Trump’s presidency.
The former vice president also sought to demonstrate his differences with the president with his selection of Ms. Harris, 56, whose presence on the ticket as the daughter of Indian and Jamaican immigrants stood in stark contrast to Mr. Trump’s relentless scapegoating of migrants and members of racial-minority groups.
Mr. Biden will be only the second Catholic to attain the presidency, along with John F. Kennedy.
In an era when political differences have metastasized into tribal warfare, at least, 74 million voters turned to a figure who has become known as the eulogist in chief for his empathy and friendships with Republicans and Democrats alike.
In a sign of how much Mr. Trump alienated traditional Republicans, a number of prominent members of the party endorsed Mr. Biden’s candidacy, including Cindy McCain, the widow of former Senator John McCain; the party’s other two presidential nominees this century, George W. Bush and Mitt Romney, declined to endorse Mr. Trump.
Yet for all his lofty language about uniting the country, Mr. Biden was a halting candidate who ran a cautious campaign, determined to ensure that the election became a referendum on Mr. Trump. The former vice president fully returned to the campaign trail only around Labour Day, and for weeks he limited his appearances to one state every other day or so. He went west of the Central time zone just once during the general election.
As he prepares to take the oath of office on Inauguration Day on January 20, he will return to Washington confronting a daunting set of crises. Mr. Biden will be pressed to swiftly secure and distribute a safe vaccine for the Coronavirus, revive an economy that may be in even more dire shape in January than it is now, and address racial justice and policing issues that this year prompted some of the largest protests in American history.
And he will do so with a Congress that is far more polarized than the Senate he left over a decade ago, with many Republicans having embraced Mr. Trump’s nativist brand of populism and Democrats increasingly responsive to an energized left. If Mr. Biden cannot bridge that divide as president and elicit some cooperation from the G.O.P., he will face immense pressure from his party’s progressive wing to abandon conciliation for a posture of combat.
Mr. Biden has held out hope about working with Republican lawmakers while declining to support his party’s most ambitious goals, like single-payer health care and the Green New Deal; he has resisted structural changes such as adding justices to the Supreme Court.
This irked his party’s base but made it difficult for Republicans, from Mr. Trump down the ballot, to portray him as an extremist. Mr. Biden was largely absent from the appeals of G.O.P. candidates, who instead used their advertising to insist that the Democratic Party would be in the hands of more polarizing figures on the left such as Senator Bernie Sanders.
Unlike the last two Democrats who defeated incumbents after voters tired of Republican leadership, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, Mr. Biden will not arrive in the capital as a youthful outsider. Instead, he will fill out a Democratic leadership triumvirate, which includes Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer, of lawmakers who are 70 or older.
Mr. Biden alluded to himself during the campaign as a transitional figure who would bring the country out of a crisis and then make way for a new generation. But he has privately rejected suggestions that he commit to serving just a single term, viewing that as an instant guarantee of lame-duck status.
One of the most significant tests of Mr. Biden’s presidency will be in how he navigates the widening divisions in his party.
He may enjoy a honeymoon, though, because of both the scale of the problems he is grappling with and the president he defeated.
This election represented the culmination of nearly four years of activism organized around opposing Mr. Trump, a movement that began with the Women’s March the day after his inauguration. Indeed, Mr. Biden’s election appeared less the unique achievement of a political standard-bearer than the apex of a political wave touched off by the 2016 election — one that Mr. Biden rode more than he directed it.
But Mr. Trump’s job approval rating never hit 50 percent and, when the Coronavirus spread nationwide and Mr. Biden effectively claimed the Democratic nomination in March, the president’s hopes of running with a booming economy and against a far-left opponent evaporated at once.
Still, many Democrats were nervous and some Republicans were defiantly optimistic going into the election, both still gripped by Mr. Trump’s shocker four years ago. And well into the night Tuesday, it seemed as if the president might be able to do it again. But four days later, after a year of trial in America and four turbulent years of the Trump administration, victory was in hand for Mr. Biden.

Continue Reading

News

SERAP Drags FG To ECOWAS Court Over N78.8bn Cash Transfer

Published

on

The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sued the Federal Government at the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice over alleged diversion, irregular expenditure and failure to account for N78.8bn allocated to cash-transfer and social-protection programmes.

SERAP, in a statement released by its Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, yesterday, said the allegations involved the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Reduction, the National Cash Transfer Office and the National Social Safety Nets Coordinating Office.

The allegations were documented in the Auditor-General of the Federation’s 2024 Annual Report, published on August 7, 2026.

According to the report, the findings covered various periods between January 2023 and December 31, 2024.

In the suit, marked ECW/CCJ/APP/42/26 and filed last week, SERAP is seeking a declaration that the government’s failure to account for the funds violates Nigeria’s international human rights obligations.

The organisation is also asking the court to order the government to provide a comprehensive account of the questioned funds, investigate the alleged irregularities, recover any money improperly spent or diverted where established, and strengthen financial oversight of social-protection programmes.

SERAP argued that the alleged financial irregularities could undermine the rights of vulnerable Nigerians to social security and an adequate standard of living, including access to food, clothing and housing.

The statement party read, “The funds were intended to benefit over 3.2 million households across 35 states, whose access to financial assistance has been affected by the allegations made by the Auditor-General.”

The suit, filed by SERAP’s lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare and Kehinde Oyewumi, stated that the government’s failure to investigate the allegations and recover any improperly spent funds violated its obligations to protect vulnerable households.

“The failure to investigate the N78.8 billion cash-transfer scandal, account for the questioned funds and recover any unlawfully spent amounts violates Nigeria’s obligations to protect the human rights of vulnerable households,” the suit partly read.

The organisation said it instituted the case to protect affected households and ensure accountability for public funds allocated for their benefit.

“SERAP brings this public-interest case to protect the interests of affected households and ensure accountability for public funds allocated for their benefit,” it stated.

The organisation maintained that cash-transfer programmes could help address extreme poverty and enable vulnerable people to meet their basic needs, but argued that the government had a duty to ensure the funds were properly managed.

“The right to social security cannot be effectively realised merely by establishing a formal cash-transfer programme where the State fails to maintain reasonable systems for identifying beneficiaries, maintaining records, reconciling disbursements, monitoring expenditure, investigating irregularities and remedying losses,” the statement further stated.

According to SERAP, the Auditor-General questioned approximately N33.751bn reportedly transferred to more than 3.2 million households across 35 states in 2023, noting that adequate records to verify the payments and reconcile beneficiary records were not provided.

The report also identified N36.744bn in payments allegedly made without prepayment audits, N4.616bn in unsupported expenditures, N350.182m for enrolment, N89.511m for store purchases and N17.422m in diesel advances.

SERAP said the suit was brought under Article 9(4) of the ECOWAS Court Protocol to protect affected households and ensure accountability for public funds intended for social protection.

“The issue is whether the government has discharged its obligations under applicable human-rights treaties to safeguard resources allocated for social protection, investigate documented financial irregularities, provide effective remedies and ensure that those resources are applied for their intended purposes,” it stated.

The organisation also cited the constitutional responsibility of the Auditor-General to audit and report on the public accounts of the Federation and the offices and agencies of the Federal Government, describing the findings in the annual report as important official records of public expenditure.

It relied on Articles 1 and 2 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, arguing that the government had obligations to give effect to protected rights and ensure that failures in administering social-protection programmes did not result in discriminatory exclusion or unequal access to benefits.

“The Nigerian government has the obligation to take effective measures to prevent and address corruption and related misuse of public resources. The government has failed to take appropriate measures in response to the allegations made by the Auditor-General”, the statement added.

SERAP said it had previously urged President Bola Tinubu and relevant authorities to account for the questioned funds, publish audit records, investigate irregular expenditures, recover any funds unlawfully spent or diverted and take appropriate action against those responsible.

Following the publication of the Auditor-General’s report, the organisation issued a public statement and sent a letter dated September 5, 2026, requesting action on the findings. It also sought payment and beneficiary records, verification documents and an explanation for the missing REMITA records.

“The deadline given to the government to address the Auditor-General’s findings had elapsed without adequate action,” it stated.

The organisation further cited Articles 1 and 21 of the African Charter, alongside Article 9 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption, as requiring effective measures to protect rights and resources, promote transparent public financial management, investigate irregularities and recover public funds where losses or improper expenditure were established.

SERAP also relied on the works of legal scholar Kolawole Olaniyan, including Corruption and Human Rights Law in Africa, published by Hart Publishing in 2014, and Ownership of Proceeds of Corruption in International Law, published by Oxford University Press in 2023. It said the publications provided persuasive academic authority on corruption’s effects on human rights, public resources, accountability and international legal remedies.

“SERAP accordingly submits that the Auditor-General’s findings cannot be treated merely as administrative irregularities where public funds allocated for social protection may have been lost, improperly spent or left unaccounted for, and the government fails to take effective corrective action,” the statement added.

SERAP is asking the court to direct the government to conduct an independent, prompt and effective investigation into the identified irregularities, recover public funds improperly spent, diverted or lost where established, and take appropriate legal or administrative action against those found responsible, in accordance with due process.

It also wants the government to strengthen financial accountability, beneficiary verification, auditing, reconciliation and oversight mechanisms to prevent a recurrence of the alleged irregularities and ensure that eligible vulnerable households receive their intended benefits.

The organisation is further seeking an order restraining the government from administering or disbursing cash-transfer and social-protection funds without adequate accountability and oversight mechanisms, as well as appropriate remedies for any established adverse effects on beneficiaries’ protected rights.

No date has, however, been fixed for the hearing of the suit.

Continue Reading

News

FG releases N38.93bn to upgrade 166 tertiary institutions

Published

on

The Federal Government has released N38.93bn to 166 public tertiary institutions nationwide under the Needs Assessment Revitalisation Fund to address infrastructure deficits and improve teaching and learning facilities.

The intervention covers 79 universities, 46 polytechnics and 41 colleges of education, with universities receiving the largest share of the allocation.

The Federal Ministry of Finance disclosed this in a statement issued on Sunday by its Head of Media, Efe Ovuakporie, explaining that the funds would support approved projects in beneficiary institutions.

The statement read, “The Federal Government has disbursed N38.93bn to 166 public tertiary institutions nationwide under the Needs Assessment Revitalisation Fund.”

According to the ministry, the university component accounts for N28.5bn, while N5.8bn has been allocated to polytechnics and N4.7bn to colleges of education.

According to the ministry, the university component accounts for N28.5bn, while N5.8bn has been allocated to polytechnics and N4.7bn to colleges of education.

An analysis of the allocations by PUNCH Online showed that universities would receive approximately 73.2 per cent of the announced N38.93bn intervention, making them the largest beneficiaries.

Polytechnics would account for about 14.9 per cent, while colleges of education would receive approximately 12.1 per cent.

The ministry explained that the intervention was intended to address longstanding infrastructure challenges in public tertiary institutions and support the implementation of agreements reached between the Federal Government and the Academic Staff Union of Universities.

It stated, “The intervention forms part of the Federal Government’s efforts to address the needs of public universities and support the implementation of agreed measures under the Memorandum of Understanding between the Federal Government and the Academic Staff Union of Universities.”

The Needs Assessment Revitalisation Fund is designed to support improvements in institutional infrastructure and other identified needs, particularly in public universities, where inadequate facilities have remained a recurring concern in negotiations between the government and academic unions.

The ministry said the latest disbursement would enable beneficiary institutions to begin new projects or continue previously approved interventions aimed at improving their operational capacity.

“The funds are expected to enable beneficiary institutions to commence or advance approved projects addressing critical infrastructure and other identified institutional needs, with the overall objective of strengthening the quality of tertiary education in Nigeria,” it added.

The government also emphasised the need for coordination among the Federal Ministry of Finance, Federal Ministry of Education and beneficiary institutions to ensure that the released funds produced measurable improvements.

It noted that effective collaboration would be necessary to translate the financial intervention into improved infrastructure, institutional capacity and learning conditions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Senate Passes Bill For Establishment Of Federal University Of Agriculture In Rivers

Published

on

The bill to approve the establishment  of  the Federal University of Agriculture, Emughan, Abua-Odual Local Government Area of Rivers State has passed third reading.

The Bill, titled  “A Bill for an Act to Amend the Federal Universities of Agriculture Act, Cap. F22, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2024” was sponsored by Senator Ipalibo Harry Banigo representing Rivers West Senatorial District.

The bill seeks to amend the existing Federal Universities of Agriculture Act to provide for the establishment of the proposed institution in Emughan community in Rivers State.

The passage of the bill by the Senate marks a significant legislative milestone towards the establishment of the proposed university.

When established, the institution is expected to expand access to higher education, promote agricultural research and innovation, develop skilled manpower, and contribute to the economic growth of Rivers State and Nigeria at large.

According to a statement made available to The Tide, the bill, having passed the Third Reading in the Senate, will now proceed to the House of Representatives for concurrence as part of the legislative process towards its enactment into law.

The bill underscores Senator Banigo’s  commitment to advancing educational opportunities and strengthening agricultural development in Rivers State.

By: Kevin Nengia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending