By John Q. Hosedrinker 
During the 2026 Winter Olympics opening ceremony in Milan, Team USA athletes received a warm reception as they entered the stadium. However, the mood shifted when Vice President JD Vance and his wife appeared on the Jumbotron, drawing boos from the crowd. This reception for Vance occurred amidst ongoing protests against U.S. immigration policies and while the country’s political situation under the Trump administration garnered global attention. The Israeli delegation also faced boos, in contrast to the applause given to Ukraine.
Read the original article here
The Winter Olympics opening ceremony provided a striking contrast in public reception, with American athletes receiving enthusiastic cheers while JD Vance was met with significant boos. It appears the global audience was far more interested in celebrating athletic achievement than in the presence of political figures, especially those perceived as divisive.
The reception for the US athletes was overwhelmingly positive, highlighting the universal appeal of sports and the dedication of the Olympians. This outpouring of support is a testament to the unifying power of the Games, where the focus is rightfully placed on the athletes’ years of hard work and their pursuit of excellence on the world stage.
In stark contrast, JD Vance’s appearance was met with audible disapproval. While it might be tempting to focus on the political implications, the sentiment seems to be that people attended to cheer for athletes, not politicians. The boos directed at Vance suggest that the crowd perceived him as a political figure out of place at an event meant to honor athletic prowess.
There’s a strong sense that the public understood the distinction between the athletes and the political figures accompanying them. The desire was to celebrate the competitors, and the boos for Vance indicated a clear message that his presence was not welcomed by a significant portion of the attendees. It’s a reminder that at events of this magnitude, the focus should remain on the athletes and their extraordinary journeys.
The fact that there were reports of attempts to mute the boos, or that broadcasters might have edited them out, further emphasizes the perceived unpopularity of Vance. If the intent was to ensure a polite reception, it clearly backfired, and the very act of trying to suppress dissent might have amplified the sentiment. The desire for a pure celebration of sport was clearly not met when political figures drew such negative attention.
The overwhelming consensus appears to be that the crowd was discerning, and their disapproval of Vance was a direct response to his perceived political persona. The sentiment that people don’t like fascists, and therefore boo them, suggests a strong ideological opposition that was vocalized during the ceremony. It’s a powerful illustration of how political ideologies can clash even in the context of a global sporting event.
The idea that some might have actively *wanted* Vance to be booed, precisely because they were asked not to, is a common observation in crowd dynamics. When an authority or organizer tries to preemptively quell dissent, it can often have the opposite effect, galvanizing those who wish to express their disapproval. This scenario seems to fit that pattern.
Ultimately, the event served as a potent reminder that while athletes unite, certain political figures can divide. The cheers for the US athletes underscored the positive spirit of the Olympics, while the boos for JD Vance served as a stark illustration of his perceived unpopularity and the audience’s desire to keep politics separate from the celebration of sport. The contrast painted a clear picture of who the crowd was there to support, and it wasn’t the politician.