Connect with us

Published

on

Americans likely face a choice this fall between two men they dont want for president. Or they can stay home and get one of the two guys they dont want for president anyway. The reasons for voter disdain are clear enough: Poll respondents say Joe Biden is too old, an impression reinforced by last weeks special-counsel report, and they have always been troubled by Donald Trumps judgment and character (though a majority think hes too old too.)

Voters have genuine questions about both men. But weve seen each occupy the presidency. One thing the two administrations have made clear is that whereas Biden follows an approach to governance that seems to offset some of his weaknesses, Trumps preferred managerial style seems to amplify his.

Many people treat elections as a chance to vote a single individual into office; as a result, they tend to focus disproportionately on the personality, character, and temperament of the people running. But voters are also choosing a platforma set of policies as well as a set of people, chosen by the president, who will shape and implement them. The president is the conductor of an orchestra, not a solo artist. As the past eight years have made very clear, the difference in governance between a Trump administration and a Biden administration is not subtlefor example, on foreign policy, border security, and economicsand voters have plenty of evidence on which to base their decision.

But for the sake of argument, lets consider the potential effects of Bidens failures of memory and Trumps well, its a little tough to say what exactly is going on with Trumps mental state. The former president has always had a penchant for saying strange things and acting impulsively, and its hard to know whether recent lapses are indications of new troubles or the same deficits that have long been present. His always-dark rhetoric has become more apocalyptic and vengeance-focused, and he frequently seems forgetful or confused about basic facts.

To what extent would either of their struggles be material in a future presidential term? One key distinction is that Biden and Trump have fundamentally different conceptions of the presidency as an office. Bidens approach to governance has been more or less in keeping with the traditions of recent decades. Bidens Cabinet and West Wing are (for better or worse) stocked with longtime political and policy hands who have extensive experience in government. Cabinet secretaries largely run their departments through normal channels. Policy proposals are usually formulated by subject-area experts. The presidents job is to sit atop this apparatus and set broad direction.

Read: The presidency is not a math test

Biden doesnt always defer to experts, and he has clashed with and overruled advisers on some topics, including, notably, the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Such occasional clashes are fairly typicalas long as theyre occasional. As my colleague Graeme Wood wrote this week, The presidency is an endless series of judgment calls, not a four-year math test. In fact, large parts of the executive branch exist, in effect, to do the math problems on the presidents behalf, then present to him all those tough judgment calls with the calculations already factored in.

This doesnt mean that Bidens readily apparent aging doesnt bring risks. The presidency requires a great deal of energy, and crises can happen at all hours and on top of one another, testing the stamina of any person. The oldest president before Biden, Ronald Reagan, struggled with acuity in his second term, an administration that produced a huge, appalling scandal of which he claimed to be unaware.

In contrast to the model of the president as the ultimate decision maker, Trump has approached the presidency less like a Fortune 500 CEO and more like the sole proprietor of a small business. (Though he boasts about his experience running a business empire, the Trump Organization also ran this wayit is a company with a large bottom line but with concentrated and insular management by corporate standards.) As president, Trump had a tendency to micromanage detailsthe launching system for a new aircraft carrier, the paint scheme on Air Force Onewhile evincing little interest in major policy questions, such as a long-promised replacement for Obamacare.

At times, Trump has described his role in practically messianic terms: I alone can fix it, he infamously said at the 2016 Republican National Convention. He has claimed to be the worlds foremost expert on a wide variety of subjects, and he often disregarded the views of policy experts in his administration, complaining that they tried to talk him out of ideas (when they didnt just obstruct him). He and his allies have embarked on a major campaign to ensure that staffers in a second Trump administration would be picked for their ideological and personal loyalty to him. Axios has reported that the speechwriter Stephen Miller could be the next attorney general, even though Miller is not an attorney.

Perhaps as a result of these different approaches to the job, people who have served under the men have divergent views on them. Whereas Biden can seem bumbling and mild in public, aides accounts of his private demeanor depict an engaged, incisive, and sometimes hot-tempered president. Thats also the view that emerges from my colleague Franklin Foers book The Last Politician. He has a kind of mantra: You can never give me too much detail, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan has said. The most difficult part about a meeting with President Biden is preparing for it, because he is sharp, intensely probing, and detail-oriented and focused, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said last weekend. (As Jon Stewart noted on Monday night, the public might be more convinced were these moments videotaped, like the gaffes.)

Former Trump aides are not so complimentary. Former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly called Trump a person that has nothing but contempt for our democratic institutions, our Constitution, and the rule of law, adding, God help us. Former Attorney General Bill Barr said that he shouldnt be anywhere near the Oval Office. Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper described him as unfit for office. Of 44 former Cabinet members queried by NBC, only four said they supported Trumps return to office. Even allowing for the puffery of politics, the contrast is dramatic.

Read: A Hail Mary to save The Daily Show

None of this is to say that Bidens memory lapses arent worth concern or that he is as vigorous as he was as a younger man. But someone voting for Biden is selecting, above all, a set of policy ideas and promises that he has laid out, with the expectation that the apparatus of the executive branch will implement them.

Voting for Trump is opting for a charismatic individual who brings to office a set of attitudes rather than a platform. Considering the presidency as a matter of individual mental acuity grants the field to Trumps own preferred conception of unified personal power, so its striking that the comparison makes the dangers posed by Trumps mentality so stark.

Continue Reading

Politics

Sir Jim Ratcliffe scolds Tories over handling of economy and immigration after Brexit

Published

on

By

Sir Jim Ratcliffe scolds Tories over handling of economy and immigration after Brexit

Billionaire Sir Jim Ratcliffe has told Sky News that Britain is ready for a change of government after scolding the Conservatives over their handling of the economy and immigration after Brexit.

While insisting his petrochemicals conglomerate INEOS is apolitical, Sir Jim backed Brexit and spent last weekend with Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer at Manchester United – the football club he now runs as minority owner.

“I’m sure Keir will do a very good job at running the country – I have no questions about that,” Sir Jim said in an exclusive interview.

“There’s no question that the Conservatives have had a good run,” he added. “I think most of the country probably feels it’s time for a change. And I sort of get that, really.”

Read more: Sir Jim’s mission to succeed at ‘the one challenge the UK has never brought home’

Sir Jim was a prominent backer of leaving the European Union in the 2016 referendum but now has issues with how Brexit was delivered by Tory prime ministers.

“Brexit sort of unfortunately didn’t turn out as people anticipated because… Brexit was largely about immigration,” Sir Jim said.

More from Politics

“That was the biggest component of that vote. People were getting fed up with the influx of the city of Southampton coming in every year. I think last year it was two times Southampton.

“I mean, no small island like the UK could cope with vast numbers of people coming into the UK.

“I mean, it just overburdens the National Health Service, the traffic service, the police, everybody.

“The country was designed for 55 or 60 million people and we’ve got 70 million people and all the services break down as a consequence.

“That’s what Brexit was all about and nobody’s implemented that. They just keep talking about it. But nothing’s been done, which is why I think we’ll finish up with the change of government.”

Watch Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s full interview on the Trevor Phillips on Sunday morning programme on Sky News from 8.30am

UK needs to get ‘sharper on the business front’

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has indicated an election is due this year but Monaco-based Sir Jim is unimpressed by the Conservatives’ handling of the economy.

“The UK does need to get a bit sharper on the business front,” he said. “I think the biggest objective for the government is to create growth in the economy.

“There’s two parts of the economy, there’s the services side of the economy and there’s the manufacturing side. And the manufacturing, unfortunately, has been sliding away now for the last 25 years.

“We were very similar in scale to Germany probably 25 years ago.

“But today we’re just a fraction of where Germany is and I think that isn’t healthy for the British economy… particularly when you think the north of England is very manufacturing based, and that talks to things like energy competitiveness, it talks to things like, why do you put an immensely high tax on the North Sea?

“That just disincentivises people from finding hydrocarbons in the North Sea, in energy.

“And what we need is competitive energy. So I mean, in America, in the energy world, in the oil and gas world, they just apply a corporation tax to the oil and gas companies, which is about 30%. And in the UK we’ve got this tax of 75% because we want to kill off the oil and gas companies.

“But if we don’t have competitive energy, we’re not going to have a healthy manufacturing industry. And that just makes no sense to me at all. No.”

‘We’re apolitical’

Asked about INEOS donating to Labour, Sir Jim replied: “We’re apolitical, INEOS.

“We just want a successful manufacturing sector in the UK and we’ve talked to the government about that. It’s pretty clear about our views.”

Sir Jim was keener to talk about the economy and politics than his role at struggling Manchester United, which he bought a 27.7% stake in from the American Glazer family in February – giving him an even higher business profile.

Old Trafford stadium in Manchester. Pic: AP
Image:
Old Trafford stadium in Manchester. Pic: AP

Push for stadium of the North

He is continuing to push for public funds to regenerate Old Trafford and the surrounding areas despite no apparent political support being forthcoming. Sir Keir was hosted at the stadium for a Premier League match last weekend just as heavy rain exposed the fragility of the ageing venue.

“There’s a very good case, in my view, for having a stadium of the North, which would serve the northern part of the country in that arena of football,” Sir Jim said. “If you look at the number of Champions League the North West has won, it’s 10. London has won two.

“And yet everybody from the North has to get down to London to watch a big football match. And there should be one [a large stadium] in the North, in my view.

“But it’s also important for the southern side of Manchester, you know, to regenerate.

“It’s the sort of second capital of the country where the Industrial Revolution began.

“But if you have a regeneration project, you need a nucleus or a regeneration project and having that world-class stadium there, I think would provide the impetus to regenerate that region.”

Continue Reading

World

Oleksandr Usyk defeats Tyson Fury to become heavyweight champion of the world

Published

on

By

Oleksandr Usyk defeats Tyson Fury to become heavyweight champion of the world

Oleksandr Usyk has become the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world after defeating British boxing star Tyson Fury.

The Ukrainian won on a split decision following the match in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Usyk had 115-112 and 114-113 on two cards, while Fury took the other 114-113.

Follow the match as it happened

Fury disputed his loss after the match, saying: “I believe I won that fight. I think he won a few rounds but I won the majority of them.

“His country is at war, so people are siding with the country at war. Make no mistake, I won that fight in my opinion.

In response Usyk said he was “ready for rematch,” but later added: “I don’t think about rematch now, I want to rest.”

Pic: PA
Image:
Pic: PA

Fury came under early pressure, with Usyk taking the centre of the ring with an aggressive offensive from the start.

At one point Fury was pushed against the ropes and started laughing as Usyk applied pressure.

The “Gypsy King” looked relaxed as he moved around the ring in the early rounds and picked his shots.

Tyson Fury lunges at Oleksandr Usyk. Pic: PA
Image:
Fury lunges at Usyk. Pic: PA

But after Usyk landed a right hook in the ninth round it looked as if Fury was in serious trouble.

The Ukrainian followed up by unloading freely but somehow the bookmakers’ favourite stayed on his feet and was given a standing 10-second count saved by the bell.

It left Fury struggling through the final three rounds as Usyk chased him around the ring.

Tyson Fury v Oleksandr Usyk. Pic: Action Images via Reuters
Image:
Pic: Action Images via Reuters

The 37-year-old Ukrainian became the first boxer to hold all four major heavyweight belts at the same time and the first undisputed champion in 24 years.

Oleksandr Usyk celebrates with the undisputed heavyweight title belt after his victory
Image:
Oleksandr Usyk celebrates with the undisputed heavyweight title belt. Pic: PA

He’s the best fighter of a generation, there’s nothing left



Jacquie Beltrao

Sports presenter

There’s something very special about Oleksandr Usyk and it’s something all brilliant sports people have: the ability to find that extra bit of grit, to dig a bit deeper, when the battle is slipping away.

It’s exactly the character he showed, coming back at Fury in the 7th and 8th rounds, with some impressive shots, to take the sting out of any Fury resurgence and to swing momentum back his way. And enabling him to go for the kill in that brilliant 9th round. Fury looked stung, he looked confused and he was lucky the referee didn’t stop the fight there and then.

It was amazing that Fury made it to the end. That took courage. But it’s hard to see how he’s going to recover from this. It’s going to hurt. He says he wants to invoke the rematch clause and go again, but will he really want to?

Will Usyk want to? He’s the best fighter of a generation, there’s nothing left to prove. No fighter has ever won the undisputed cruiserweight championship of the world and followed that with the undisputed heavyweight crown. He can take four belts back to Kyiv safe in the knowledge that it’s unlikely anyone will be able to match that achievement anytime soon.

Last night, Fury weighed in at 262lbs (18st 10lbs) – nearly three stone heavier than Usyk, who clocked in at a career heaviest of 223lbs (15st 13lbs).

Fury refused to look at his opponent during a news conference on Thursday, but did not back down at the weigh-in last night, where the pair almost came to blows before being separated by their entourages.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Enter the Cossack warrior and ‘Gypsy King’

Usyk arrived into the ring first, dressed as a Cossack warrior.

Fury entered to songs by Barry White and Bonnie Tyler, with the “Gypsy King” spending several minutes dancing on stage before the song changed to Holding Out For A Hero.

Anthony Joshua watched from the ringside, knowing he could meet the winner early next year.

Continue Reading

World

Fury v Usyk: The fight of the century – as it happened

Published

on

By

Continue Reading

Trending