Latest news with #WashingtonRedskins
Fox News
4 days ago
- Politics
- Fox News
NFL star Von Miller mistakenly calls Commanders by former name as Trump threatens stadium deal
NFL veteran Von Miller referenced his new team by their former name after President Donald Trump threatened to block federal support for the Commanders' new stadium project in Washington D.C. over his desire to reinstate the Redskins name. Speaking to the media after training camp on Thursday, Miller expressed the motivation behind his desire to return to the gridiron. "My 15th year in the league, it never gets old – especially being out of work for four months, perspective kind of changes a little bit. You know, back when you were young it was like, 'Man why do we gotta go to OTAs? Man, I wish I was home.' And then you're sitting on the couch for four months, and it's like, 'Man, I wish I was at OTAs.'" But in his message to the media, Miller referenced the team as the Redskins. "It's good dropping the kids off, and it's good picking the kids up from school, but I wanna go to work. The Washington Redskins called me a month and a half ago and started talking, and agreed to come here to Washington about a week and a day ago, and here I am. Excited to be here." The slip-up comes as President Trump has called on the team to revert to its former name, which was dropped in 2020. "My statement on the Washington Redskins has totally blown up, but only in a very positive way," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. "I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington. The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone." Commanders general manager Adam Peters said earlier this week that issues like the stadium rights "don't really make it to us." "We're just trying to focus on what's going on here and getting ready for the season." A vote on the deal that would allow the Commanders to return to their former home at RFK Stadium is set to take place on Aug. 1. The deal includes a $3.7 billion redevelopment project featuring a new stadium, housing units, retail space and parkland. The plan to move back to D.C. from the Maryland suburbs is estimated to be around 2030 – that is, if the legislation is approved. The White House has made it clear that the president's comments on the NFL team are legitimate. "The president was serious," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday. "Sports is one of the many passions of this president, and he wants to see the name of that team changed."
CBS News
5 days ago
- Politics
- CBS News
Despite Trump's threat to block new Washington Commanders' stadium, D.C. council announces deal
The Washington, D.C., city council chairman announced Thursday that a deal has been reached between the city and the Washington Commanders on an amended stadium agreement, despite threats earlier this week from President Trump to block any deal. The NFL team is in negotiations with the district over their plans to build a new stadium at the RFK Stadium site in D.C. 30 years after decamping to Maryland, but the proposal faces myriad challenges up ahead. Mr. Trump said on July 20 that if the Commanders "don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington." The team changed their name from the "Washington Redskins" five years ago, as the term is widely considered a racist slur against Native Americans, but Mr. Trump has recently revamped calls for a return to the old name. "I think that everyone has been perplexed by the President's comments, and in that sense, they certainly have not been helpful. I don't know where they go. And I have actually characterized him as a distraction, in the many senses of that word," D.C. Council chairman Phil Mendelson said of Mr. Trump's comments at a press conference Thursday. The council is set to vote on the proposal on Aug. 1, with a second vote set for Sept. 17, according to Mendelson. Mendelson said he is "confident that we will have the votes necessary" to pass the agreement next week. In addition to the looming threats from the president, the D.C. Council and the Commanders also face the technical difficulties surrounding the transfer of control over the RFK Stadium property. While the stadium is located on federal land, the city was given permission by Congress in January to control the property for 99 years, which would allow for its redevelopment. The agreement reached today signals a step towards receiving approval from city councilors over the redevelopment plan, but the real test will come with the Aug. 1 vote. Regardless of the forthcoming roadblocks, the proposal seems to have widespread support, both from district politicians and residents. "Bringing the Commanders home is about more than a stadium. It's about creating jobs, attracting revenue, and driving investment to Ward 7—and it's coming at [a] time when we need it the most," D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser said Thursday. The deal, as of its latest amendments, includes $950 million in revenue benefits for D.C., and is estimated to save district taxpayers $55 million, according Mendelson. "A lot of the reaction that we got from residents, at least, that I heard, and I think my colleagues would agree, was that the deal could be better for the district. And I mean, I heard from many people, 'I support the team. I want the team in a district, but I think it could be a better deal.' And so I think the Commanders heard that," Mendelson said. The negotiations will likely continue, with possible additional amendments to be made later on, but while Mendelson said "there's still a lot that has to be worked out in terms of legal documents," the current deal represents the "basic framework" of the agreement. Mendelson, who previously raised concerns over the proposal due to its costs, said he "[put] aside my own view" on the deal due to support from D.C. residents and his fellow council members, and has since been satisfied with the progress. "[T]he Commanders have been very positive, constructive in our negotiations," Mendelson said. "I have no complaint."
The Hill
22-07-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Just 25 percent approve of Trump stadium threat over Commanders name change: Survey
A new poll found 25 percent of Americans approve of President Trump's threat to nix a stadium deal in Washington over the name of the local football team. 'I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington,' Trump said on Sunday. 'The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone. Cleveland should do the same with the Cleveland Indians,' he added. Fifty-eight percent of respondents in the YouGov Monday poll said they disapproved of the president's comments regarding a name reversal for the Washington Commanders NFL franchise, and 16 percent of people were unsure of their feelings. Under the agreement, the football franchise would return from playing gamedays in Maryland to a renovated multi-billion-dollar stadium in Washington by 2030. The Commanders franchise has pledged to invest $2.7 billion in the project, marking the single largest private investment in D.C.'s history. A majority, 65 percent of participants from the country's Northeastern and Southern regions, said it was unacceptable for the U.S. president to tell a professional sports team to change its name. Fifteen percent disagreed and 21 percent were unsure. The poll found that only 34 percent of Americans approved of the 2022 decision to rename the Washington Redskins, the Commanders. Forty-three percent of people disapproved of the move, while 23 percent were unsure how they felt.
Boston Globe
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Trump likes renaming people, places and things. He's not the first to deploy that perk of power.
Related : Advertisement A name, after all, defines identity and even reality because it is connected to the verb 'to be,' says one brand strategist. Get Love Letters: The Newsletter A weekly dispatch with all the best relationship content and commentary – plus exclusive content for fans of Love Letters, Dinner With Cupid, weddings, therapy talk, and more. Enter Email Sign Up 'A parent naming a child, a founder naming a company, a president naming a place ... in each example, we can see the relationship of power,' Shannon Murphy, who runs Nameistry, a naming agency that works with companies and entrepreneurs to develop brand identities, said in an email. 'Naming gives you control.' Trump reignited a debate on football and American identity In Trump's case, reviving the debate over the Washington football team's name had the added effect of distraction. 'My statement on the Washington Redskins has totally blown up, but only in a very positive way,' he wrote on his social media platform, adding a threat to derail the team's deal for a new stadium if it resisted. Advertisement In this 2019 photo, the then Washington Redskins logo is seen on FedEx Field prior to an NFL football game between the New York Giants and the Redskins in Landover, Md. The team has since been rebranded as the Washington Commanders. Mark Tenally/Associated Press In fact, part of the reaction came from people noting that Trump's proposed renaming came as he struggled to move past a rebellion among his supporters over the administration's refusal to release much-hyped records in Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking investigation. Over about two weeks, Trump had cycled through many tactics — downplaying the issue, blaming others, scolding a reporter, insulting his own supporters, suing the Wall Street Journal and finally authorizing the Justice Department to try to unseal grand jury transcripts. Trump's demand that the NFL and the District of Columbia change the team's name back to a dictionary definition of a slur against Native Americans reignited a brawl in miniature over race, history and the American identity. Trump's reelection itself can be seen as a response to the nation's reckoning with its racial history after the 2020 police killing of George Floyd. That year, Americans elected Democratic President Joe Biden, who championed diversity. During his term, Washington's football team became first the Washington Football Team, then the Commanders, at a widely estimated cost in the tens of millions of dollars. And in 2021, The Cleveland Indians became the Cleveland Guardians. In 2025, Trump has ordered a halt to diversity, equity and inclusion programs through the federal government, universities and schools, despite legal challenges. And he wants the Commanders' name changed back, though it's unclear if he has the authority to restrict the nearly $4 billion project. Is Trump's 'Redskins' push a distraction or a power play? What's clear is that names carry great power where business, national identity, race, history and culture intersect. Trump has had great success for decades branding everything from buildings he named after himself to the Gulf between Mexico, Cuba and the United States to his political opponents and people he simply doesn't like. Exhibit A: Florida's governor, dubbed by Trump 'Meatball Ron' DeSantis, who challenged him for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination. Advertisement And Trump is not the first leader to use monikers and nicknames — branding, really — to try to define reality and the people who populate it. Naming was a key tool of colonization that modern-day countries are still trying to dislodge. 'Naming,' notes one expert, 'is never neutral.' 'To name is to collapse infinite complexity into a manageable symbol, and in that compression, whole worlds are won or lost,' linguist Norazha Paiman wrote last month on Medium. 'When the British renamed places throughout India or Africa, they weren't just updating maps," Paiman wrote. 'They were restructuring the conceptual frameworks through which people could relate to their own territories.' This is not Trump's first rebranding push Trump's order to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America is perhaps the best-known result of Executive Order 14172, titled 'Restoring Names That Honor American Greatness.' The renaming sent mapmakers, search engines and others into a flurry over whether to change the name. And it set off a legal dispute with The Associated Press over First Amendment freedoms that is still winding through the courts. The news outlet's access to events in the Oval Office and Air Force One was cut back starting in February after the AP said it would continue referring to the Gulf of Mexico in its copy, while noting Trump's wishes that it instead be renamed the Gulf of America. President Donald Trump holds up a signed proclamation declaring Feb. 9 Gulf of America Day, as Interior Secretary Doug Burgum watches aboard Air Force One as Trump travels from West Palm Beach, Fla. to New Orleans, Feb. 9, 2025. Ben Curtis/Associated Press It's unclear if Trump's name will stick universally — or go the way of 'freedom fries,' a brief attempt by some in the George W. Bush-era GOP to rebrand french fries after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Advertisement But there's evidence that at least for business in some places, the 'Gulf of America' terminology has staying power. Chevron's earnings statements of late have referred to the Gulf of America, because 'that's the position of the U.S. government now,' CEO Mike Wirth said during a Jan. 31 call with investors. And along the Gulf Coast in Republican Louisiana, leaders of the state's seafood industry call the body of water the Gulf of America, in part, because putting that slogan on local products might help beat back the influx of foreign shrimp flooding American markets, the Louisiana Illuminator news outlet reported. Renaming is a bipartisan endeavor The racial reckoning inspired by Floyd's killing rippled across the cultural landscape. Quaker retired the Aunt Jemima brand after it had been served up at America's breakfast tables for 131 years, saying it recognized that the character's origins were 'based on a racial stereotype.' Eskimo Pies became Edy's. The Grammy-winning country band Lady Antebellum changed its name to Lady A, saying they were regretful and embarrassed that their former moniker was associated with slavery. And Trump didn't start the fight over football. Democratic President Barack Obama, in fact, told The Associated Press in 2013 that he would 'think about changing' the name of the Washington Redskins if he owned the team. Trump soon after posted to Twitter: 'President should not be telling the Washington Redskins to change their name-our country has far bigger problems! FOCUS on them, not nonsense.' Fast-forward to July 20, 2025, when Trump posted that the Washington Commanders should change their name back to the Redskins. 'Times,' the president wrote, 'are different now.' Advertisement
Miami Herald
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Trump says NFL's Washington Commanders must change name. But do Americans agree?
President Donald Trump has called on two professional sports teams to revert to their former names. But, do Americans agree? In a series of posts on Truth Social on July 20, the president took aim at the NFL's Washington Commanders and MLB's Cleveland Guardians. Both franchises rebranded several years ago due to concerns about the use of Native American names and imagery. Referring to the former, he said, 'I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders.'' He also threatened to block a deal allowing the team to construct a new stadium in Washington, D.C. 'Cleveland should do the same with the Cleveland Indians,' Trump added. 'MAKE INDIANS GREAT AGAIN (MIGA)!' However, while Americans are divided over the name changes, a majority oppose the president's statement and his involvement in the matter, according to a new YouGov poll. Agree or disagree with Trump statement? In the survey — which sampled 4,162 U.S. adults on July 21 — 58% of respondents said they strongly (48%) or somewhat (10%) disapproved of Trump's statement. Meanwhile, one-quarter said they strongly (13%) or somewhat (12%) approve, and 16% said they were unsure. The question prompted a significant partisan divide. Most Democrats and independents — 84% and 62%, respectively — said they opposed the statement, while 55% of Republicans said they favored it. Should president get involved? Additionally, nearly two-thirds of respondents, 65%, said it is unacceptable for the president 'to tell a professional sports team to change its name.' Just 15% described this as acceptable, and 21% said they weren't sure, according to the poll, which has a margin of error of 2.7 percentage points. Here, again, there was a noticeable divide across the political spectrum. Most Democrats and independents — 88% and 65% — said the president's weighing in is not acceptable. Republicans were more evenly split, with 38% calling it unacceptable and 32% labeling it as acceptable. Should teams have changed names? Despite widespread opposition to Trump's involvement in the matter, pluralities of respondents said they were against both teams changing their names. Forty-three percent of respondents said they strongly (29%) or somewhat (14%) disapproved of the Washington Redskins — who played as the Washington Football Team during the 2020 and 2021 seasons — rebranding as the Commanders. Meanwhile, 34% said they strongly (21%) or somewhat (13%) approved. Similarly, 42% of poll respondents said they strongly (28%) or somewhat (14%) disapproved of the Cleveland Indians being renamed the Guardians. In contrast, 30% said they strongly (16%) or somewhat (14%) approved the decision. On both counts, Republicans were far more likely than Democrats and independents to oppose the name changes. The rebrandings were the result of years of deliberations. In 2020, the two teams announced they would review their names, following nationwide racial injustice protests, prompted by the death of George Floyd, according to USA Today. In 2021, Cleveland picked its new name, the Guardians, inspired by the stone traffic guardians on a bridge in the city, according to the Associated Press. The following year, Washington's football team followed suit, announcing its new name, the Commanders, in honor of the capital's military ties.
