Chicago is out of the running as an Olympic site after being eliminated in the first round of voting. I think the Obama Administration should have gotten better vote count intelligence before having a US President and First Lady put in this clearly embarrassing position. Spending political capital and reputation needlessly is not helpful at this time with major issues on the line (ie: health care and future action in Afghanistan)
www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27834.html
Please share widely!
I think Obama was right to go there, but these 100 spoiled dilletantes are the wrong people to govern the Olympic movement. Madrid is only there because half of the voters owe allegiance to that Spaniard former waterboy for Francisco Frano, Juan Antonio Samaranch. It will take decades of bleaching the remove his stink from the Olympic Movement.
<
p>Chicago and Tokyo had the two technically superior bids and had the two bids with the most rigorous financial backing. Rio has sentiment on its side, and Madrid has Samaranch.
<
p>While I can see the reason to award the Games to Rio, the elimination of Chicago on the first ballot is a putrid disservice to the Olympic Games.
Didn’t his term as IOC President end a couple of Olympiads ago? Also, can you elaborate on why other members are loyal to him? (Sorry if that should be obvious, but I haven’t the first clue as to how IOC members are chosen or any of its internal procedures.)
Samaranch gave a video appeal from Madrid on behalf of the bid, where he declared that his time on Earth is almost up and would like to see the games return to Spain (he’s 89).
<
p>You get on the IOC according to a vote from IOC members — it’s like a fraternity. When Samaranch was president, he would hand-pick the candidates for open seats, and many current IOC folks, including Jacques Rogge of Belgium, were brought up on his coattails.
<
p>Add in the fact that Samaranch had a well-known dislike for America (just examine his behavior throughout the ’96 Atlanta Games), and I’ve no doubt he did everything he could to steer it away from Chicago. I’m just surprised it so effective — if Madrid wins the games it will be a travesty.
…of his behavoir at the Atlanta Games. Where does his dislike of the US come from?
…I was down there for the Games, and spent a lot of time shooting the sh-t with volunteers. Samaranch spent a great deal of time complaining about the advertising he would see at the games (no more or less than typical, from anything I’ve read) and it’s commercialization.
<
p>Samaranch attended fewer events than typical for the IOC President, indeed did not show up to quite a few on his schedule. And at the Closing Ceremonies, he declared “well done”, in place of the traditional declaration of whichever Games that just concluded that they were “the best ever”. Samaranch made this an important change, blasting out a press release with his intentions to change the wording well before the ceremonies.
<
p>It’s tough to tell where this anti-Americanism is rooted. Of course, as an ally of Francsico Franco, there’s no reason for him to much like any American or democratic government. He also perceived American opposition to many of his goals — Americans were perceived as backing Paris over his home city of Barcelona in the voting for the 1992 Olympics, Peter Ueberroth (organizer in 1984) wrote an extensive book including episodes of bailing out Samaranch in many instances running up to those games, and Samaranch even came to regard American diplomats as interfering with his desire for a Nobel Peace Prize. He retired in late 2000 and tried to spread support for the 2002 Peace Prize…which went to Jimmy Carter.
Sabutai…I agree with your assessment of the Olymic organization. I just think someone should have counted the beans before sending our President and his wife off on a fool’s errand which puts them in an embarrassing situation. Others could have represented the Chicago interests there. JMO, I may not be right, perhaps there is no harm done. it’s just that on the world stage, face saving is important sometimes.
Universal sentiment in the press would be that it would be neck-and-neck between Rio and Chicago. I would be hard-pressed to find anyone who saw this coming.
n/t
No source in the US, Britain, France, Switzerland, or anywhere else that I read had it anything other than Rio v Chicago. That was certainly the case for bookies around the world. Obama’s people failed in that they believed the same as everyone else.
I’m in general agreement with sabutai here, but …
<
p>Rio vs. Chicago, for your three week
vacationsporting event? Which would you pick?So what if Obama spent some time pitching Chicago? I don’t believe this hurts his reputation one bit, although Republicans may like to portray it that way.
One would think that these fools who imagine Obama trying to succor European “socialists” would be glad that he isn’t viewed as a loyal stooge.
<
p>No, Republicans’ only political plan is to complain and hope for luck to turn in their favor.
The only decent way to understand the vote is to look at it round by round…and it seems to indicate that Rio had it in the bag from the beginning.
<
p>IOC members from the country of a candidate city are not eligible to vote…however they may vote if their city is eliminated. The lowest-scoring city in each round loses. Voting continues until a city wins 50%+1 of the total votes.
<
p>Here’s the round-by-round total:
Round 1
Madrid: 28 votes
Rio de Janeiro: 26 votes
Tokyo: 22 votes
Chicago: 18 votes
<
p>Four eligible voters chose not to vote…Jacques Rogge, IOC President, chose not to vote. Until recently, the first vote saw weak bids eliminated, but a change that divides the bidding process into two stages shears off the weak bids (including Doha, Qatar) earlier in the process.
<
p>Now, the first round largely becomes a chance to demonstrate loyalty and build up favors for bids down the round. Hence, the European IOC puts Madrid near the top. I remain stunned that Tokyo snuck ahead of Chicago in this, and I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the mandarins of the Olympic Movement didn’t expect this either.
<
p>Round 2
Tokyo: 20 votes
Rio de Janeiro: 46 votes
Madrid: 29 votes
<
p>Having fulfilled their obligations, 2 Tokyo voters abandon their city. Of the three voters who abstained from the first round only to vote in subsequent rounds, 1 went to Madrid. The other two — and every single supporter of Chicago, rallied behind Rio de Janeiro. Rio was only 3 votes shy of winning 50%+1.
<
p>Round 3
Rio de Janeiro: 66 votes
Madrid: 32 votes
<
p>Tokyo’s loss releases 20 voters…only 3 go to Madrid. The others go to Rio.
<
p>Looking at this, it’s clear that Rio had this going in. Whether the other semi-finalist had been Madrid, Tokyo, or Chicago, it seems in retrospect that Rio had this locked up, just as Beijing had it locked up eight years ago.
<
p>The shock remains Chicago’s early exit. As I mention upthread, I think Madrid’s baffling survival through the final round is rooted in the continuing influence of ex-Fascist Juan Antonio Samaranch. Simply put, Madrid was the weakest bid in fiscal, technical, and geopolitical terms. Though one can strongly argue the IOC made the right decision, something like this makes it seem they made the right decision almost in spite of themselves.