Who do you think will host the 2016 Summer Olympic games?

Time to vote below:

Chicago

Madrid

Rio de Janeiro

Tokyo

I’m thinking Tokyo, but something icky in me says Chicago.

2016. Youngest graduates in 2010. Spouse just picked up a client who will likely keep us here through 2014. If it is Chicago in 2016 I think I’m going to plan to live faaaar away by then.

By the way, the 2010 Winter games are headed to Vancouver, the 2012 Summer games are London-bound, and 2014 Winter games will be seen from Russia.

Comments

  1. Wilson828 says:

    Well everyone seems excited about the economic impact to Chicago and Milwaukee too.

    I always wanted to go to the games.

    But to be really honest? I don’t want them this close. No offense… I just don’t want the hassle of it all.

    So I vote anywhere but here.

  2. Karin Wii B. Sharin says:

    Who do I want to win: Chicago

    Who do I think will win: Tokyo or Chicago

    Chicago has a great shot because it’s been 20 years since the last Olympics were on US turf (Atlanta – ’96). Additionally the IOC makes bank off endorsements from US companies, having it in the states would only mean more sponsorship $.

    I think Madrid is out because that means the IOC would have put the games on the same continent 3/4 rounds in a row: ATHENS, beijing, LONDON, [MADRID]??? I doubt it.

    South America has the World Cup in 2014, which would hurt their chance to receive sponsorship $ and the Olympics would be forced to share the sporting spotlight for too long.

    Tokyo has a great plan that utilizes existing infrastructure and would work hard to make them environmentally sustainable (also part of Chicago’s plan).

    As for the nay sayers who think the games will cause too much congestion around the parts of Milwaukee, I disagree. Sure, during the two week run of the games in August 2016 we may see an increase in traffic; however majority of the Chicago plan contains 90% of the games within a 10mi or so radius from downtown.

    On that note: LETS GO WINDY CITY

  3. It will not be Tokyo. The last Olympics were in Asia. It’s too soon.

    If anyone thinks they are going to be inconvenienced by a Chicago Olympics, go rent a house in Minnesota during that month. You can sublet your own place for a truck load of money to some minor Russian oligarch and then roll around in the cash when the games are over.

    These games are great for Wisconsin — especially since Illinois will foot most of the bill.

  4. The Lorax says:

    It will be Rio or Chicago.

    However, most agree that the African delegation (being the only delegation without a candidate on its continent) will be heavily swayed by Obama. Why? He’s black, remember?

    JB’s right. We’re going to reap benefits.

  5. J. Strupp says:

    Chicago. One of the best cities in the world.

  6. Randy in Richmond says:

    If it isn’t Chicago Obama is much dumber than I thought. The person that wouldn’t do an interview on Fox would not go to Denmark without knowing something.

    Chicago

  7. Chicago. The fix has to be in. Remember the Chi-town election mantra, Vote early and vote often! Cindy, why sweat 2016? If the Mayans were right all this will be over in 2012 anyway!

  8. RMS, you are so correct. That’s all being correlated with the data from the Web bot, too, you know.

    Whew. I have no worries.

  9. Randy in Richmond says:

    Well, I was wrong. I thought Oprah was a lock.

  10. It was really a no-win situation for Obama. Maybe they knew they were in trouble and the trip was a last ditch effort to save the bid.

  11. Randy in Richmond says:

    Cindy
    I think just the opposite. I believe they thought they had it in the bag and Barack Obama wanted some of the credit. What has happened is that many of his followers have seen the water give-way below the feet. The announcer at CNN was dumbfounded (great video). I bet he had champaign under his desk.