On Sunday, Nov. 9, President Donald Trump attended the Washington Commanders’ regular-season game against the Detroit Lions in Landover, Md. This marks a notable event in sports history, as it is the first time a sitting U.S. president has attended a regular-season NFL game since Jimmy Carter watched the Commanders’ victory against the Dallas Cowboys in 1978. Yet, this historical event has stirred feelings of controversy and disapproval from sports fans and constituents alike. Leading up to Trump’s attendance at the Commanders’ game, ESPN reporters Don Van Natta Jr. and Adam Schefter reported on the president’s wish to name the Commanders’ new stadium after himself. The recent report, aided by game attendees’ general political dissent, resulted in a series of long-winded boos each time he made an on-screen appearance at Sunday’s game.
Importantly, the president’s endeavor deters from the common ways in which sports stadiums have been named throughout history. Oftentimes, they honor geographical locations, team legends, corporations, or deceased historical figures. Thus, if the president succeeds, it will mark the first time in which a living person, let alone a political figure, has imposed their name on a sports stadium. While the endeavor may be a simple act of self-preservation, it presents challenges to the history of conservative politics in sports as well as the cultural sanctity of American sports tradition. In recent years, there has been a strong sentiment of “keeping politics out of sports” within conservative media. Notably, after former San Francisco 49ers player Colin Kaepernick knelt in protest of police brutality during the national anthem at a 2016 preseason game, Donald Trump and running mate Mike Pence publicly condemned Kaepernick for disrespecting the American flag. In an interview with KIRO radio station, Trump followed up by stating, “maybe he should find a country that works better for him.”
Following his win in the 2016 presidential election, Trump was the subject of another historical act of sports-affiliated protest. In a 2018 interview with ESPN, Lebron James discussed the injustices faced by Black athletes and called the president out for failing to understand the American people. Laura Ingraham, a conservative journalist, disapproved of Lebron’s political activism on her Fox News show, stating he should “shut up and dribble.” This statement, along with Trump’s disapproval of Kaepernick’s sports-affiliated protest, provides a level of irony to the president’s current NFL ambitions. The Trump campaign’s response to Kaepernick showcases a general misunderstanding of how racial discrepancies are an interconnected facet of politics and sports, and after bringing light to this fact, James was paradoxically criticized by conservative media for “politicizing” sports.
What Ingraham, Trump, and associated party members may fail to realize is that the political influence of sports dates back to the foundations of American society. In the country’s early years, sports were largely enjoyed as a pastime for elites, and they reflected the privileged and oppressive lifestyles of white landowners. It wasn’t until the late 19th century that the working class engaged in sport, and this catalyzed the formation of labor groups and grassroots civil rights movements. Entering the 20th century, athletes like Jack Johnson, the first African American heavyweight boxing champion, demonstrated their athletic prowess to a skeptical American audience and made space for future marginalized groups in the elitist world of sports. At the 1936 Olympics, American gold-medalists discovered the power of sports at a heightened level, when Jesse Owens, the son of a sharecropper, and the University of Washington’s rowing team, composed of eight working-class men, taunted Germany’s “Aryan” athletes and contributed to growing World War Ⅱ tensions.
From the mid-20th-century onward, sports have continued to diversify and reflect major societal shifts, and the activism of athletes like Kaepernick and Lebron make these changes possible. With that being said, how the District of Columbia and the Commanders decide to honor their new stadium will contribute to the sanctity and political history of American sports. Whether they or constituents believe President Trump is worthy of that honor is uncertain, but if his wish is fulfilled, it may hold daunting implications for the future of conservative politics in sports.
