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.
May be Philly could host one of the events (ie soccer games) just like Birmingham did when Atlanta hosted due to being in the same region.
I believe Chicago's recent proposal had Minneapolis/St Paul hosting one or more of the soccer matches and these details will likely be revealed as the USOC puts together their formal package for the upcoming (2017) IOC presentation.
Thought LA would have had the inside track and would presume their presentation wasn't up to snuff. Good pick in Boston and hope they get the games. Last two US bids by New York and Chicago finished in a rather meager 4th place by each.
Could you please get out here with this Everybody Hates DC crap? There were two other cities that lost too. You don't hear them whining about "hate."
You're so over the top. I'm just relaying the message people have been saying for the past month. Take it up with them. I have read it multiple times. Here are just two examples of many:
Livingstone also said Washington presented a “big risk” to the USOC, given its association with American politics and symbolism. “On the international scene, that might be hard to swallow,” he said.
“Whenever anyone thinks of Washington, they think of politics. The group’s leaders have worked hard to dispel that perception, but I don’t know if that’s going to work.”
"Washington has been considered a dark horse in the race, if only because the capital's politics might not appeal to IOC members in other countries."
Look, it doesn't really matter anyway. People view D.C. how they want to view D.C. Do I believe the city shouldn't be grouped in with the President and congress, yes. It's not going to happen though so we might as well get over it. People will stop associating us with politics when Americans feel we deserve representation in this country. I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
Last edited by MDAllstar; 01-09-2015 at 09:18 AM..
No offense to Boston but I think they have very little chance of winning. I think the USOC is throwing out Boston as a sacrificial lamb for 2024, knowing full well the winning shot is 2028. I think the USOC is crossing its fingers that either Chicago or NYC will re-enter the race. If they do, the US (by this I mean NYC or Chicago) wins in 2028. It's been far too long since the US has hosted. The problem is, NYC and Chicago both feel burned by the USOC and IOC, so I don't think either is too keen on going through the process again.
You're so over the top. I'm just relaying the message people have been saying for the past month. Take it up with them. I have read it multiple times. Here are just two examples of many:
Look, it doesn't really matter anyway. People view D.C. how they want to view D.C. Do I believe the city shouldn't be grouped in with the President and congress, yes. It's not going to happen though so we might as well get over it. People will stop associating us with politics when Americans feel we deserve representation in this country. I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
I think an argument can be made for the opposite, meaning I think a lot believe DC is a barrier to representation
Its a double edged sword. With the govt comes an influx to the local economy and can also bring the givt association.
DC to me as a place is just fine. Most I believe have feelings on the govt association, also at times some perceived preferential treatment relative to federal funds and/or govt excess. In the end this will always come with being the Capital
On the world view I can understand. I think the IOC likely does not want to risk association even if tangential with the US capital. Both pro and con feelings. The US being the main world power presents a juxtaposition for the IOC as the Olympics are supposed to be non political. So DC presents a challenge that they may just want to avoid good, bad or indifferent...
No offense to Boston but I think they have very little chance of winning. I think the USOC is throwing out Boston as a sacrificial lamb for 2024, knowing full well the winning shot is 2028. I think the USOC is crossing its fingers that either Chicago or NYC will re-enter the race. If they do, the US (by this I mean NYC or Chicago) wins in 2028. It's been far too long since the US has hosted. The problem is, NYC and Chicago both feel burned by the USOC and IOC, so I don't think either is too keen on going through the process again.
Not saying Boston is a shoe in to win or anything, but Olympic committees do not dedicate funds and resources just to throw a city out there. It costs an estimated $100m to go through the bid process. The Boston 2024 bid is backed by some very well connected businessmen, athletes, university presidents, architects and politicians. The USOC is not going to waste those peoples time nor their own.
Add to that the USOC has taken huge steps towards repairing their relationship with the IOC. Even renegotiating broadcast revenue rights. Why would they give up that chip and not use it in their next bid? If you do not plan to win, you dont bid, simple as that.
Finally the President of the IOC posted an Op-Ed in the Boston globe a few days before the USOC decision (You can read it here: IOC President Thomas Bach: A new Olympics - Opinion - The Boston Globe) He did not write an Op-Ed for any other US city, only Boston. He wanted to speak directly to Boston for a reason, before the USOC voted. I very much think that the IOC nudged the USOC towards selecting Boston and there must be a reason for that. Also note that quite a few of the IOC members have strong ties to the Boston area and its Universities. Do not underestimate that factor either.
Chosing Boston indicates that the 2024 Olympics wont be held in the U.S. after all, but I'm not sure why. The USOC's b.s. excuses of "political issues", being the reasons why they didn't choose S.F. or D.C. is comical, so they choose the least known city of the four with virtually no real poll outside of America as the city to compete against metropolises like Rome and Paris? Political issues occur at all Olympics; D.C. might have a few protests, and S.F. certain will have some attention whores (from Oakland) but that's about it. I'm not sure why but it sounds like USOC just wanted to forfeit. Everybody wanted the Olympics in San Francisco, but we knew L.A. was likely to get it, and if D.C. got it we would understand their desire for Federal backing, but Boston was the final choice?
Either the USOC knows something about the IOC we don't or they're being ironic just for the sake of it. They chose the city that actively has a plethora of the city against the Olympics. Makes no sense whatsoever. Yeah, right USOC, I'm sure the IOC will choose a city nobody outside the United States even cares about over the first African city to ever host the Olympics. Sounds like the U.S. might be hosting 2032, because its clear the USOC forfeited '24.
Chosing Boston indicates that the 2024 Olympics wont be held in the U.S. after all, but I'm not sure why. The USOC's b.s. excuses of "political issues", being the reasons why they didn't choose S.F. or D.C. is comical, so they choose the least known city of the four with virtually no real poll outside of America as the city to compete against metropolises like Rome and Paris? Political issues occur at all Olympics; D.C. might have a few protests, and S.F. certain will have some attention whores (from Oakland) but that's about it. I'm not sure why but it sounds like USOC just wanted to forfeit. Everybody wanted the Olympics in San Francisco, but we knew L.A. was likely to get it, and if D.C. got it we would understand their desire for Federal backing, but Boston was the final choice?
Either the USOC knows something about the IOC we don't or they're being ironic just for the sake of it. They chose the city that actively has a plethora of the city against the Olympics. Makes no sense whatsoever. Yeah, right USOC, I'm sure the IOC will choose a city nobody outside the United States even cares about over the first African city to ever host the Olympics. Sounds like the U.S. might be hosting 2032, because its clear the USOC forfeited '24.
Sounds like you're a bit upset Boston was chosen over San Francisco. Remember that time Atlanta beat out San Francisco to get the US bid for 1996 and then beat out both Athens and Toronto to host the actual games? Boston is not nearly as far fetched as you are making it seem.
I think an argument can be made for the opposite, meaning I think a lot believe DC is a barrier to representation
Its a double edged sword. With the govt comes an influx to the local economy and can also bring the givt association.
DC to me as a place is just fine. Most I believe have feelings on the govt association, also at times some perceived preferential treatment relative to federal funds and/or govt excess. In the end this will always come with being the Capital
On the world view I can understand. I think the IOC likely does not want to risk association even if tangential with the US capital. Both pro and con feelings. The US being the main world power presents a juxtaposition for the IOC as the Olympics are supposed to be non political. So DC presents a challenge that they may just want to avoid good, bad or indifferent...
So, allow us to become a state and separate the land holding the Capitol, White House, and National Mall which is the current proposal on the table. We would then use our own taxes and get state Federal funds like the rest of you. I'm saying, what do you guys want? We asked to be a state? You guys said no. Now, you complain we are a Federal District so we get Federal funds. We can't win for losing. Smh...
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.
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.
