Donald Trump knows how to sniff out a scene. And 2026, with its procession of grandiose events, promises to be the most spectacular year of his two presidencies. The 250th anniversary of Independence, a football World Cup at home and, icing on the cheesecake, its own 80th birthday: almost everything will be concentrated at the same time on a handful of weeks in the heart of summer, from June to July.
For a showman president obsessed with political drama, this is a unique alignment of planets. The whole world will have its eyes on the United States. And Trump intends that no one forgets these weeks of festivity of which he wants to be the conductor.
It is in this context that he made a spectacular threat this week, announcing that he could withdraw certain matches of the 2026 World Cup from cities deemed “dangerous” Or “poorly managed”. Boston, the great New England metropolis, is the most recent target. “If security is not ensured, we will move the matches”he said this week, during a meeting with Argentine President Javier Milei, promising to speak directly to FIFA President Gianni Infantino. San Francisco and Seattle had already been criticized in similar terms.
The stadiums are ready, most tickets have been sold, sponsors have been appointed
Trump imagines a World Cup sheltered from antifa, pro-migrant processions and the usual ideological ferment of big cities, where a militant left sees in each stadium stand a platform for its counter-propaganda. Basically, the threat seems rather fragile. The contracts between Fifa and the host cities were signed in 2022. The stadiums are ready, most of the tickets have been sold, the sponsors have been appointed. Moving a match is now impossible. Fifa alone decides on the sites. As for Republican cities with large stadiums, they are rare and generally do not have the hotel infrastructure to replace the urban behemoths acquired by the Democrats.
Municipal elections approaching
The American press has understood that it is not really a question of taking action. Trump is not seeking to reorganize the World Cup (which is being held, moreover, jointly with Canada and Mexico), he is seeking to make an impression. He knows that these cities do not like him, disapprove of his policies as well as his person and, worse, resist the attacks of his immigration agents who have come to evict the illegal immigrants who live there in large numbers. He also knows that the mere mention of a withdrawal of matches can cause local turmoil. Because Trump knows these cities by heart.
As a good New Yorker, as a former Democrat, he has observed for decades the way in which the American left administers its great metropolises. He loathes their bloated bureaucracy, their tolerance of street crime, and the permanent standoff they impose on his administration. These are his natural opponents and sources of Democratic votes. Since his return to the White House, the Republican has continued to push where it hurts: money and prestige.
His threats come at a moment in busy American politics. Several municipal elections are approaching. Boston, Philadelphia, Seattle will vote at the beginning of November: three Democratic strongholds which will host World Cup matches. The most followed will be held in New York, a showcase for the progressive and multiculturalist left that Trump most loathes. The probable victory of Democrat Zohran Mamdani, a figure of the radical left, candidate of Ugandan and Muslim origin, enrages the president. Trump called him “pure communist”, threatened to arrest him if he interfered with the operations of the ICE immigration agency, and promised to withhold federal aid to the city if he “is not behaving properly”.
The World Cup is not just a tournament. It is an arena where security rhetoric mixes with electoral strategy
Cutting off the supplies of an American city is not easy. Budgetary power rests with Congress, and the courts have already blocked his attempts to sanction “sanctuary cities” during his first presidency. But Trump is smart. His experience has taught him to circumvent the obstacles of justice: through administrative delays, program freezes, new conditions for granting subsidies.
In this logic, the World Cup is not a simple tournament. It is an arena where security rhetoric mixes with electoral strategy. Once the tournament ends on July 19, 2026, there will be less than four months before the high-risk midterms for the rest of the Trump mandate. Regardless of the legal fragility of its threats, they already structure the debate and remind us that Washington can still strike where we least expect it, like a ball slipped between the gloves of an overconfident goalkeeper.
