Does Obama Boost Chicago's OG Hopes?


Normally open July 4th only---the one day a year when partisan politics, religion, etc. are acceptable topics on this Board (within reason). The forum is now closed.

Does Obama Boost Chicago's OG Hopes?

Postby Marlow » Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:01 am

I read with interest the home-page-linked article that looks at this.

If Obama stands for 'Hope' then I'm hopin' that he can seal the deal. Would he even get involved in the bid? Have past presidents?
Marlow
 
Posts: 21078
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Does Obama Boost Chicago's OG Hopes?

Postby Conor Dary » Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:17 am

Marlow wrote:I read with interest the home-page-linked article that looks at this.

If Obama stands for 'Hope' then I'm hopin' that he can seal the deal. Would he even get involved in the bid? Have past presidents?


Blair sure did. I think Chicago was the favorite before the election. Rio has the 2014 World Cup and I can't see the IOC awarding them the Olympics only two years later. Too big an ego is involved, to run second fiddle. Madrid won't get it since London has it. And the same for Japan. Ergo, Chicago, and with Obama in it should be a shoo in. Now Cook County just has to figure on how to pay for it. Fortunately, I live about a half mile from the county line, so we will be safe.
Last edited by Conor Dary on Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Postby gh » Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:28 am

Perhaps more than Obama sealing the deal, conventional wisdom is that it at least keeps the hope alive, whereas a McCain victory would have been the death knell.

Not that your vote for president should have anything to do with whether or not a city gets the Olympics.
gh
 
Posts: 46302
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby Marlow » Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:35 am

gh wrote:Not that your vote for president should have anything to do with whether or not a city gets the Olympics.

Blasphemy! That was my #1 reason!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21078
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby Pego » Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:26 pm

Kuha will admonish me for saying this, but never in my life did I want anything as badly as this.

GO, CHICAGO!!!!!!
Pego
 
Posts: 10196
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Postby bambam » Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:24 pm

gh wrote:Perhaps more than Obama sealing the deal, conventional wisdom is that it at least keeps the hope alive, whereas a McCain victory would have been the death knell.


That was the skinny that McCain would put the kibosh on Chicago but I was not as certain. I thought, and continue to think Chicago is the front runner. Even the European-based IOC realizes eventually that they better grease the palms of the USOC and US television network and hold the Games here every 20 years or so. Despite The Olympic Partners (TOP - formerly The Olympic Programme), television still contributes about 60% of revenues to the Olympic Movement and about 1/2 of that is from the US Television networks. Further of the 12 companies affiliated with TOP, most of them are US-based companies, so well over 50% of the revenues to the Olympic Movement stem from US-based corporations.

With Obama in, especially as that is his hometown, I think Chicago is a shoe-in.
bambam
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Postby eldrick » Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:51 pm

bambam wrote:so well over 50% of the revenues to the Olympic Movement stem from US-based corporations


then they shoud be pulling for no worse than 1 in 2 held in america, perhaps even 3 out of 5
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Re: Does Obama Boost Chicago's OG Hopes?

Postby eldrick » Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:53 pm

Conor Dary wrote:Rio has the 2014 World Cup and I can't see the IOC awarding them the Olympics only two years later


'68 '70

'72 '74

'94 '96
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Postby gh » Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:12 pm

I have no idea what the numbers were before, but if you Goggle "Obama" and "Olympics" today you get 12.5 million hits and a list of 228 current news items. I'd say the subject is pretty much in play!
gh
 
Posts: 46302
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby bambam » Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:21 pm

eldrick wrote:
bambam wrote:so well over 50% of the revenues to the Olympic Movement stem from US-based corporations


then they shoud be pulling for no worse than 1 in 2 held in america, perhaps even 3 out of 5


You're right. They probably should but the IOC is so Europeo-centric that they would never do that.
bambam
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Does Obama Boost Chicago's OG Hopes?

Postby Conor Dary » Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:55 pm

eldrick wrote:
Conor Dary wrote:Rio has the 2014 World Cup and I can't see the IOC awarding them the Olympics only two years later


'68 '70

'72 '74

'94 '96


I had forgotten about those. But I think the first two are irrelevant. Money, ie tv, has changed both the WC and the Olympics exponentially since then. As for the third instance 94 was the whole US, at least in most people's minds, while 96 was only one city. 2014 and 2016 is Rio. So again I really think Chicago is the shoe-in, with Obama now the new president.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest