90jili slot

90jili slot DAZN ADVANCES GLOBAL EXPANSION WITH ACQUISITION OF FOXTEL, A LEADING AUSTRALIAN SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA GROUPFrance’s Macron set to name new prime minister on Friday

On December 10th, in a surprising turn of events, renowned journalist Matt Hughes exclusively reported that following the dismissal of Ed Woodward, Manchester United has made the decision to discontinue the position of Director of Football, previously held by John Murtough. This bold move comes shortly after the departure of Richard Arnold, the club's Group Managing Director, as part of a major restructuring within the Red Devils' hierarchy.Reports suggest that the source of the conflict between Lewandowski and Fati and Mendy stemmed from a training session where the striker was critical of the younger players' performance. This criticism did not sit well with Fati and Mendy, leading to a heated argument that took place in front of the entire team.

Jonah Goldberg Among elites across the ideological spectrum, there's one point of unifying agreement: Americans are bitterly divided. What if that's wrong? What if elites are the ones who are bitterly divided while most Americans are fairly unified? History rarely lines up perfectly with the calendar (the "sixties" didn't really start until the decade was almost over). But politically, the 21st century neatly began in 2000, when the election ended in a tie and the color coding of electoral maps became enshrined as a kind of permanent tribal color war of "red vs. blue." Elite understanding of politics has been stuck in this framework ever since. Politicians and voters have leaned into this alleged political reality, making it seem all the more real in the process. I loathe the phrase "perception is reality," but in politics it has the reifying power of self-fulfilling prophecy. Like rival noble families in medieval Europe, elites have been vying for power and dominance on the arrogant assumption that their subjects share their concern for who rules rather than what the rulers can deliver. In 2018, the group More in Common published a massive report on the "hidden tribes" of American politics. The wealthiest and whitest groups were "devoted conservatives" (6%) and "progressive activists" (8%). These tribes dominate the media, the parties and higher education, and they dictate the competing narratives of red vs. blue, particularly on cable news and social media. Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of Americans resided in, or were adjacent to, the "exhausted majority." These people, however, "have no narrative," as David Brooks wrote at the time. "They have no coherent philosophic worldview to organize their thinking and compel action." Lacking a narrative might seem like a very postmodern problem, but in a postmodern elite culture, postmodern problems are real problems. It's worth noting that red vs. blue America didn't emerge ex nihilo. The 1990s were a time when the economy and government seemed to be working, at home and abroad. As a result, elites leaned into the narcissism of small differences to gain political and cultural advantage. They remain obsessed with competing, often apocalyptic, narratives. That leaves out most Americans. The gladiatorial combatants of cable news, editorial pages and academia, and their superfan spectators, can afford these fights. Members of the exhausted majority are more interested in mere competence. I think that's the hidden unity elites are missing. This is why we keep throwing incumbent parties out of power: They get elected promising competence but get derailed -- or seduced -- by fan service to, or trolling of, the elites who dominate the national conversation. There's a difference between competence and expertise. One of the most profound political changes in recent years has been the separation of notions of credentialed expertise from real-world competence. This isn't a new theme in American life, but the pandemic and the lurch toward identity politics amplified distrust of experts in unprecedented ways. This is a particular problem for the left because it is far more invested in credentialism than the right. Indeed, some progressives are suddenly realizing they invested too much in the authority of experts and too little in the ability of experts to provide what people want from government, such as affordable housing, decent education and low crime. The New York Times' Ezra Klein says he's tired of defending the authority of government institutions. Rather, "I want them to work." One of the reasons progressives find Trump so offensive is his absolute inability to speak the language of expertise -- which is full of coded elite shibboleths. But Trump veritably shouts the language of competence. I don't mean he is actually competent at governing. But he is effectively blunt about calling leaders, experts and elites -- of both parties -- stupid, ineffective, weak and incompetent. He lost in 2020 because voters didn't believe he was actually good at governing. He won in 2024 because the exhausted majority concluded the Biden administration was bad at it. Nostalgia for the low-inflation pre-pandemic economy was enough to convince voters that Trumpian drama is the tolerable price to pay for a good economy. About 3 out of 4 Americans who experienced "severe hardship" because of inflation voted for Trump. The genius of Trump's most effective ad -- "Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you" -- was that it was simultaneously culture-war red meat and an argument that Harris was more concerned about boutique elite concerns than everyday ones. If Trump can actually deliver competent government, he could make the Republican Party the majority party for a generation. For myriad reasons, that's an if so big it's visible from space. But the opportunity is there -- and has been there all along. Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch: thedispatch.com . Catch the latest in OpinionA look at how some of Trump's picks to lead health agencies could help carry out Kennedy's overhaul

India News | PM to Inaugurate ICA Global Cooperative Conference on Monday

Trump Favorability Rating Reaches 7-Year High—As Majority Of Americans Approve Of Transition: Polls

(Bloomberg) — Donald Trump’s return to the White House is forcing one of Wall Street’s more jargon-filled corners to rethink its talking points. Investment managers targeting climate change — a concept Trump has referred to as both a “scam” and a “hoax” — say it’s time to start speaking in terms that don’t alienate the millions of Americans who voted for the president-elect. “We need to change the language we’re using when we talk about climate and the energy transition,” said Joe Sumberg, a former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. managing director who now runs real estate investments at billionaire Tom Steyer’s Galvanize Climate Solutions. The goal should be to “make sure that we don’t sound like a bunch of coastal elites coming into middle America telling people that they need to install carbon capture at their properties and compost toilets on industrial properties,” he said in an interview. It’s one of a number of takeaways from the Nov. 5 election that investors targeting a whole range of ESG (environmental, social and governance) strategies are now busy analyzing. The consensus view forming among green asset managers is that many of the policies themselves are popular, based on their uptake in many Republican states. But the way that ESG professionals tout what they do is polarizing. The election “is a wake-up call for people who label what they do as ESG or even, frankly, sustainable investing,” said Ian Simm, the chief executive of Impax Asset Management, which oversees about $50 billion dedicated to investing in the clean-energy transition. “These are relatively new terms and they don’t always sit well with a traditional or mainstream view of fiduciary duty,” Simm said in an interview. “People who are using these ESG and similar phrases to reflect a values-driven or even ethical view of investment are now increasingly and probably unavoidably forced to declare their hands.” Since Trump’s election victory, investors have dumped stocks associated with high-profile ESG themes such as wind and solar. And analysts have even advised ESG professionals to keep their lawyers close, given the new political environment. The president-elect has made clear he plans to ratchet up fossil-fuel production, wind back environmental protections and embrace deregulation. That follows more than two years of ESG bans and legal threats in mostly Republican states. How the ESG investment industry communicates its agenda in a GOP-dominated America will be crucial in shaping its survival. So far, there has been “a lot of confusion and frankly a lot of laziness around definitions and the framing of these issues,” Simm said. “ESG as a phrase or label has been with us for far too long and needs to be replaced with clearer language.” As the political environment grows increasingly hostile toward all things labeled ESG, those whose business depends on it are being told to quickly adapt. The day after the US election, analysts at Jefferies predicted ESG professionals will stop touting their efforts in terms that once defined their work. Aniket Shah, the lead analyst of the Nov. 6 Jefferies note, said the ongoing backlash should result in a more “focused and pragmatic” approach to handling and talking about ESG. Even before Trump’s election victory, efforts by GOP-led states to sue climate-finance alliances were forcing a rethink in the ESG industry. Maslansky + Partners, a New York-based consultancy that focuses on language use, warned last year that the words ESG professionals use risk “alienating half the population.” And BDO, an international network of accounting and tax consultancies, said in September that ESG programs need to stop using “technical terms that can be hard to grasp” and instead start to “communicate in the language of the business” they serve. Ultimately, the business case should speak for itself, Sumberg said. “We’re not ignorant to the fact that if a different administration was in office, they probably would be more supportive,” he said. “But at the core of it, this is already profitable.” Sumberg just oversaw a third green real estate deal this year for Steyer, with the purchase of an industrial property in New Jersey. The goals, as with the other properties Galvanize has bought, are lower energy costs and emissions, as well as higher property values. He cautions against assuming that a Trump presidency will coincide with a major retreat from green investing. “The last time Trump was in power, the tax credits were extended for wind and solar,” he said. And Trump’s first presidency also coincided with a significant increase in energy-transition investments, he said. “The reason wasn’t because the administration at that time was adding subsidies to that sector,” Sumberg said. “The reason was because it’s profitable.”13-year-old cricketer Suryavanshi can become India's latest T20 batting sensation

Jonah Goldberg: What if most Americans aren't bitterly divided?Conclusion:

Wisconsin officer grabbing Nebraska coach's arm a 'misunderstanding,' police sayMan Utd chiefs locked in blame game over expensive shambles that saw Ten Hag get new deal before being sacked