Chicago does not receive Olympic bid

[pbear19]

I definitely think Rio was the right choice.

But I am completely amused by the FB posts I've seen by some conservative friends who are blaming the loss on Obama, saying that it was his speech that caused Chicago to not get it.

[MidwayManiac]

Originally Posted by pbear19

But I am completely amused by the FB posts I've seen by some conservative friends who are blaming the loss on Obama, saying that it was his speech that caused Chicago to not get it.

Objectively, I think the Obamas did a poor job selling the IOC on what Chicago could do for them. It also seemed to me that Obama was lecturing the IOC a little bit, and that is one group that does not take kindly to being lectured.

To borrow a phrase from Jim Rome of all people, just look at the scoreboard. Before the Obamas' presentation, conventional wisdom was that Chicago would be 1 or 2. After their pitch Chicaco came in fourth. There are two explanations for this. Either the Obamas actually hurt, or it was a lost cause and there is nothing they could have done. I personally think their speeches were a lost opportunity and were not that effective. If it was a lost cause from the get-go, I wonder why they were over there in the first place, exposing themselves and the country to a humiliation, which is what happened. Either way I think it was a misjudgment by Team Obama.

I'm happy for Rio. Their timezone is close to the US's so we'll get to see a lot of stuff live. The basketball will probably be amazing. I was at a party yesterday with a bunch of Brazilians and while happy they are skeptical that all the construction can get done in time!

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by MidwayManiac

Objectively, I think the Obamas did a poor job selling the IOC on what Chicago could do for them. It also seemed to me that Obama was lecturing the IOC a little bit, and that is one group that does not take kindly to being lectured.

To borrow a phrase from Jim Rome of all people, just look at the scoreboard. Before the Obamas' presentation, conventional wisdom was that Chicago would be 1 or 2. After their pitch Chicaco came in fourth. There are two explanations for this. Either the Obamas actually hurt, or it was a lost cause and there is nothing they could have done. I personally think their speeches were a lost opportunity and were not that effective. If it was a lost cause from the get-go, I wonder why they were over there in the first place, exposing themselves and the country to a humiliation, which is what happened. Either way I think it was a misjudgment by Team Obama.

Correlation does not equal causation.

One of the NPR shows did a lot of coverage of the site selection process, and one of the interviewees was talking about how Chicago was a favorite of the newer IOC members, while Rio was a favorite of the older IOC members.

I'm not an Obama fan overall, but I don't think you can blame him for this. I think that a much more likely explanation is that the IOC just wanted to hold the Olympics in a brand new venue. The US has had the Summer games twice in the past 20 years, and 3 times in the past 25. It just wasn't Chicago's time.