Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think Houston should get it so maybe some people start giving it some more respect. Atlanta got it, so there really is no reason why Houston shouldn't. I voted Houston and San Diego. Even though I really don't think SD is international or known well enough to actually make a serious run to host it but it does have the perfect climate for it and and Olympic Training Center is already here.
I don't think LA should be allowed an Olympics for at least another 20-30 years since they've already hosted it twice. London will be the only city to have it 3 times in 2012 but that's over 60 years since the last one there.
San Fran isn't going to host one anytime soon. The city's football venue lost funding, which kicked San Francisco out of the running in hosting the 2016 Summer Olympics.
I'm pretty sure Chicago is the only American city as a choice for 2016.
They won the choice for the US and they are up against Rio, Madrid, and Tokyo. Personally, I think the winner will be Rio. They never had the games in South America. The only drawback is that FIFA World Cup 2014 is there. But the IOC really really wants to go to South America. If not, Chicago really stands a great chance for 2016. If Chicago does not get the 2016 games, Philly and Houston will make a run for the 2020 games.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.