Chicago loses in bid to host 2016 Olympics

[1979Shocker]

True, but then you have all the conservative talk show hosts cheering because Chicago/America/Obama didn't get the bid.

I think it was a long shot anyway for Chicago to have gotten the bid.

This was a no win for Obama. If he didn't go make his pitch for Chicago to host the Olympics, then conservatives would have complained because he didn't go.

[Maggie]

This was a no win for Obama. If he didn't go make his pitch for Chicago to host the Olympics, then conservatives would have complained because he didn't go.

I doubt that – I am not aware of any U.S. President that has made an in person appeal to the IOC on behalf of a host city. Moreover, President Obama originally stated he was not going to go and I don’t recall widespread criticism from conservative ranks (I don’t listen to talk radio so I can’t speak to that part of the media).

True, but then you have all the conservative talk show hosts cheering because Chicago/America/Obama didn't get the bid.

I consider myself conservative and I was not jumping for joy Chicago lost the bid (see above). This is not that big of a deal and if people are “cheering”, as you say, because they think President Obama lost the bid they need to tone it down. It is a cheap shot. You can make some legitimate points with regard to this issue but that would not be one.

[SubGod22]

I'm pretty sure most people who are happy about this are happy because of the taxes required to pay for it. As of right now we can't pay for anything so the prospect of shelling out billions of dollars for the Olympics isn't that appealing.

[ShockBand]

Plus, if you had a choice between Chicago and Rio, I mean, c'mon, lets think about it.

I present the following link as Exhibit A for Rio:

http://images.google.com/images?q=rio%20de%20janeiro%20beaches

[ISASO]

Here was the report from State Run media outlet The Associated Press on Thursday:

As cities go out, loyalties will shift. That is where the contest will be won or lost. If Tokyo goes out first, will its supporters swing behind Rio, Madrid or Chicago and by how much for each? Could Madrid stun front-runners Chicago and Rio in the second round, knocking one of them out, with its seemingly solid core of backers?

The variables are such that any city could conceivably win or lose. A few votes either way could decide it. That is especially true this time, with all four cities seen as generally capable of holding the games. Some IOC veterans say there has been no closer contest in recent memory.

To prevent bribery, IOC members aren’t allowed to visit the bidding cities — so they’ll be deciding instead based on what they’ve read in committee reports. Some will go with their gut instincts, their emotions and personal interests.

Which is where President Barack Obama comes in, literally. He jets in Friday morning, for just five hours, to try to tip the outcome to Chicago. An Obama star turn could swing it — or possibly rebound against him if his adoptive hometown is knocked out. Coming for the day of the vote is a political risk, but so, too, was the risk that Rio might win if Obama didn’t lend his charisma and inspirational example to Chicago’s final push.

His election as the first black president in U.S. history resonated loudly in Europe, which has the most IOC voting members — 46.

His wife, Michelle Obama, has worked the room before him, wowing IOC members with her charm and smarts. The first lady flew in Wednesday. While hesitant to declare that Barack Obama’s appearance could be decisive, IOC members acknowledged it was hotly anticipated.

“It is a very special moment,” said Gerhard Heiberg, an IOC executive board member from Norway. “Let me listen to him and see what kind of vision he has for the games.”

Talk show star Oprah Winfrey is part of Chicago’s hard sell, too. She swept Hollywood-style into the marbled lobby of the IOC hotel on Thursday, turning heads and stopping every other step to shake a hand or pose for a photo with IOC members and their wives.

[shockall]

I'm pretty sure most people who are happy about this are happy because of the taxes required to pay for it. As of right now we can't pay for anything so the prospect of shelling out billions of dollars for the Olympics isn't that appealing.

Perhaps some fiscally stable individuals where also thinking about who footed the millions of dollars to send Obama, his Air Force One and all the support staff (Secret Service, Press Corp, armored vehicles, etc) for this four hour meeting.

[kcshocker11]

I'm pretty sure most people who are happy about this are happy because of the taxes required to pay for it. As of right now we can't pay for anything so the prospect of shelling out billions of dollars for the Olympics isn't that appealing.

Perhaps some fiscally stable individuals where also thinking about who footed the millions of dollars to send Obama, his Air Force One and all the support staff (Secret Service, Press Corp, armored vehicles, etc) for this four hour meeting.

So I take it you werent for the US hosting the Olympics? 8)

[shockall]

I'm pretty sure most people who are happy about this are happy because of the taxes required to pay for it. As of right now we can't pay for anything so the prospect of shelling out billions of dollars for the Olympics isn't that appealing.

Perhaps some fiscally stable individuals where also thinking about who footed the millions of dollars to send Obama, his Air Force One and all the support staff (Secret Service, Press Corp, armored vehicles, etc) for this four hour meeting.

So I take it you werent for the US hosting the Olympics? 8)

I'm going to answer your question with the following two answers.

1. I would hope that the awarded city could win on the merits of the city & local population's popular sentiment, not on the merits of celebrity appearances at the Olympic meeting.

2. I would "not" want the Olympics brought here if there was even a slight chance to negatively affect us as taxpayers, create a worse terrorism atmosphere here in the USA, or result in further demise of relations with other countries. We, as taxpayers, can't even afford to imagine the cost of the security required for such an event, at this time.

[shocklight]

I think it would be fair to say that most Americans have a political view on Obama's trip. Some oppose the trip and Chicago as the host, from political points of view.

Try this version and lets see how some would view it:

Then President George Bush and country singing legend Charlie Daniels take flight to promote America hosting the Olympics in Houston, Texas.

Now tell me the liberals in the northeast, wouldn't have said a word. How many cowboy comments would we have heard? How many would have just wanted to vomit?

So please stop this, "I take it you werent for the US hosting the Olympics" crap.

I personally like Chicago, but I like Houston too. We all know this isn't about a city. Equally we all know it's about polotics!

[kcshocker11]

I think it would be fair to say that most Americans have a political view on Obama's trip. Some oppose the trip and Chicago as the host, from political points of view.

Try this version and lets see how some would view it:

Then President George Bush and country singing legend Charlie Daniels take flight to promote America hosting the Olympics in Houston, Texas.

Now tell me the liberals in the northeast, wouldn't have said a word. How many cowboy comments would we have heard? How many would have just wanted to vomit?

So please stop this, "I take it you werent for the US hosting the Olympics" crap.

I personally like Chicago, but I like Houston too. We all know this isn't about a city. Equally we all know it's about polotics!

Sorry dont agree with you! It maybe about politics with you, but thats your problem 8)

[shocklight]

I think it would be fair to say that most Americans have a political view on Obama's trip. Some oppose the trip and Chicago as the host, from political points of view.

Try this version and lets see how some would view it:

Then President George Bush and country singing legend Charlie Daniels take flight to promote America hosting the Olympics in Houston, Texas.

Now tell me the liberals in the northeast, wouldn't have said a word. How many cowboy comments would we have heard? How many would have just wanted to vomit?

So please stop this, "I take it you werent for the US hosting the Olympics" crap.

I personally like Chicago, but I like Houston too. We all know this isn't about a city. Equally we all know it's about polotics!

Sorry dont agree with you! It maybe about politics with you, but thats your problem 8)

I didn't expect for you to agree with me, that part is fine, you have your opinions and I have mine.

So if it isn't political then it's about hosting in Chicago! If it's not hosting in Chicago, then it's americans against america?

[kcshocker11]

I think it would be fair to say that most Americans have a political view on Obama's trip. Some oppose the trip and Chicago as the host, from political points of view.

Try this version and lets see how some would view it:

Then President George Bush and country singing legend Charlie Daniels take flight to promote America hosting the Olympics in Houston, Texas.

Now tell me the liberals in the northeast, wouldn't have said a word. How many cowboy comments would we have heard? How many would have just wanted to vomit?

So please stop this, "I take it you werent for the US hosting the Olympics" crap.

I personally like Chicago, but I like Houston too. We all know this isn't about a city. Equally we all know it's about polotics!

Sorry dont agree with you! It maybe about politics with you, but thats your problem 8)

I didn't expect for you to agree with me, that part is fine, you have your opinions and I have mine.

So if it isn't political then it's about hosting in Chicago! If it's not hosting in Chicago, then it's americans against america?

I think there are some reactions that are anti Obama.(Dont make me quote them because you know I can) and in this case(not all cases) it hurts Americas image not to mention childish. 8)

[Maggie]

I think there are some reactions that are anti Obama.(Dont make me quote them because you know I can) and in this case(not all cases) it hurts Americas image not to mention childish. 8)

Do you think President Obama hurt America’s image by making a personal appeal (a first, I believe, at least as it concerns US Presidents – I could be wrong but it is really not all that relevant) without complete confidence that Chicago would be awarded the Games?

Personally, I think a reasonable argument could be made that getting dismissed in the first round of judging, despite his personal plea, did more damage than a few individuals in the “chattering crowd” who might make some silly arguments. In short, by referencing so-called anti-Obama comments you are overstating your position. Besides, anti-Obama (to use your words) and anti-American (in terms of hurting America’s image) are not always mutually exclusive – in spite of what some misguided people might suggest.

I can think of several “issues” a person might have with this “situation”, as it unfolded, that are not ideological, political or personal attacks.

[kcshocker11]

I think there are some reactions that are anti Obama.(Dont make me quote them because you know I can) and in this case(not all cases) it hurts Americas image not to mention childish. 8)

Do you think President Obama hurt America’s image by making a personal appeal (a first, I believe, at least as it concerns US Presidents – I could be wrong but it is really not all that relevant) without complete confidence that Chicago would be awarded the Games?

Personally, I think a reasonable argument could be made that getting dismissed in the first round of judging, despite his personal plea, did more damage than a few individuals in the “chattering crowd” who might make some silly arguments. In short, by referencing so-called anti-Obama comments you are overstating your position. Besides, anti-Obama (to use your words) and anti-American (in terms of hurting America’s image) are not mutually exclusive – in spite of what some misguided people might suggest.

I can think of several “issues” a person might have with this “situation”, as it unfolded, that are not ideological, political or personal attacks.

No considering the head of states from all 4 were there. We were the longshot and he was trying to add weight, not to mention hes from Chicago. Many Republicans didnt react to their credit and even issued memos to that effect.
But others!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20091005/pl_politico/27902

Class response!

Moments after the Chicago news broke, former Bush deputy press secretary Scott Stanzel Tweeted, "Note to GOP officials/consultants - resist temptation to pile on about Chicago losing just becuz Obama made the pitch."
Kevin Madden, who served as Mitt Romney’s spokesman in 2008, sent around Stanzel’s sentiments to friends and cautioned against a backlash.

Classless response

A young organizer at the conservative “Defending the American Dream Summit” interrupted a panel discussion last Friday to reads the news from a BlackBerry.
A liberal tracker attending the event caught the crowd’s reaction in the Arlington, Va. hotel ballroom on video: The place erupted in hooting and wild applause, a scene perversely reminiscent of the exultation that followed the U.S. Olympic hockey team’s “Miracle on Ice” victory against the Soviets in 1980.
“[Chicago lost] on the very first vote! They did not have any chance…” the woman said to an ovation, recorded by Think Progress, an offshoot of the liberal Center for American Progress.
A blogger with the right-wing Weekly Standard reported: “Chicago loses! Chicago loses!... Cheers erupt at WEEKLY STANDARD world headquarters,” before hastily pulling down the post and replacing it with an item that omitted the newsroom reaction.
RedState's Erick Erickson ditched loftier prose and punched out the letters "Hahahahaha,”

Worst came from I bet you can guess the list. 8)

[Maggie]

I think there are some reactions that are anti Obama.(Dont make me quote them because you know I can) and in this case(not all cases) it hurts Americas image not to mention childish. 8)

Do you think President Obama hurt America’s image by making a personal appeal (a first, I believe, at least as it concerns US Presidents – I could be wrong but it is really not all that relevant) without complete confidence that Chicago would be awarded the Games?

Personally, I think a reasonable argument could be made that getting dismissed in the first round of judging, despite his personal plea, did more damage than a few individuals in the “chattering crowd” who might make some silly arguments. In short, by referencing so-called anti-Obama comments you are overstating your position. Besides, anti-Obama (to use your words) and anti-American (in terms of hurting America’s image) are not mutually exclusive – in spite of what some misguided people might suggest.

I can think of several “issues” a person might have with this “situation”, as it unfolded, that are not ideological, political or personal attacks.

No considering the head of states from all 4 were there. We were the longshot and he was trying to add weight, not to mention hes from Chicago. Many Republicans didnt react to their credit and even issued memos to that effect.

You are deflecting, as usual (although I know you were dying to do that); I already conceded there might be some “silly” arguments out there. Frankly, I don’t care what they are saying and don’t think it harms America’s image, as you suggested, one bit.

I am not going to get into a detailed critique of the trip, for reasons that will be clear after I am done. I have mixed feelings about the President injecting himself personally into the bidding process. You see - I don’t view the President of the United States on an equal plane with the leaders of Japan, Brazil, etc. – he is the Leader of the Free World and he shouldn’t set himself up to get “smacked down”.

Now that being said, I can understand an American president lobbying for an American city to obtain the Olympics, but the little blitz by the Obamas proved a bit of a PR nightmare.

Not to mention the fact that I found it a bit odd because Obama’s brand is trans-nationalism and an “America is not exceptional” multiculturalism. According to his worldview, it makes sense that a South American country — especially a powerful, ascendant country such as Brazil — should at last have its turn at hosting the Olympics (and I was sort of happy for Brazil as well but not really for those exact reasons). It did not seem consistent that this politician would lobby for his own hometown over a “yes, we can” Latin American initiative, especially one involving an exciting city such as Rio. But I digress.

I just don't know what the political fallout of the Olympics news will be. My gut says that we may be making too big a deal out of it. It seems to me that this is a really big thing because everyone assumed the fix was in. In that sense, I think it probably hurts him in ways that are extremely difficult to quantify.

I can see things going either way or, more likely, both ways. Some, who are growing weary of Obama's tendency to think he can simply charm his way through everything by putting his mug out there will see this as yet another example of his narcissism. On the other hand, a lot of people will say, with some merit, "Well, at least he tried."

I don't think these views are at all contradictory, by the way. And my hunch is that those who will see this negatively, already see him negatively. And those who see it positively, see him positively. I kind of doubt there will be much movement from one camp to the other.