Now, in the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks I know we have more pressing matters to take care of, but this had just struck me out of the blue – The 2012 Summer Olympic Games.
Why?
Two of the cities in America that are trying to get the are none other than New York City and Washington, DC.
(The other cities in the US–if you’re curious–are Tampa, Los Angeles, Cincinnati, Dallas, Houston, and San Francisco.)
Between now and April (schedule subject to change-- or course–as events warrant) the USOC has to go about and select the finalist cities for the 2012 US Bid. And by October of next year, the US bid city will be selected, which will be relayed to the IOC in March of 2003. The IOC selects which city gets the 2012 games that September.(more information>>>)
I’m curious as to how and if the terrorist attacks will change the calculus of who’s likely to get the games. Will sympathy help the chances of New York and Washington? Or will fear work against them?
Canadians will most likely weigh in with “it’s all fixed. Don’t waste your money.”
Hey, I’m not about to steal their thunder. Crap, I just did. Anyway, I don’t think the games should be given out of sympathy. Tagliabue is already getting crap for not moving the Super Bowl to New York and that’s just crap, IMHO.
I think fear is a very justifiable reason to not give it. Could you imagine the games being held in downtown Jerusalem? But 12 years is a long time and fear seems unjustified in this instance too.
In short, I dunno what’ll happen or why. I just thought I’d type a bunch of words and press submit.
I think Houston has the best bid put together (and yes, I have read all the bids. Have a friend on the Houston Olympic Commetee), but I think (and I mean no harm to any NYers) that NY will get the sympathy vote.
I know that Atlanta beat out the Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul) for the 1996 games. Why aren’t they back in contention? Seems like if they were the first runner-up then, they’d still be likely candidates now.