Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If even President Obama couldn't bring back the Games to the U.S., much less could mayor Garcetti, "very impressive human being" (whatever that means anyway), or not. Puhleeze. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RuFF said:

The article aside Mayor Garcetti is a very impressive human being. He's very accomplished and I'd be willing to bet he puts the mayors of all the other bids to shame. 

That's a bit of a stretch.

I would say he's easily the most enthusiastic and optimistic with the facts to back him up, but I doubt he is putting other bids to shame. Certainly not Paris'. He's merely giving them serious competition.

What Garcetti does have is a very likable attitude and persona. He is suave and charismatic, all good qualities to have, especially when trying to repair broken relationships with the IOC and the US.

Will it be enough? Maybe, maybe not. But I for one will not bash any of the other candidate cities or their leadership.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

I was gonna mention Obama in 2009 - and remember, the world was truly in love with him at the time.

Exactly!

We had the President of the United States there and Chicago, his hometown, was eliminated in the first round of voting.

A crushing defeat and a national embarrassment that day.




 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RuFF said:

Yea, I would rank Garcetti's accomplishments over Obamas. That's just me though. 

Do you have ANY sense of proportion??? :wacko:

This is what makes having any sort of rational and balanced sense of discussion on the race with you so difficult and prickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Do you have ANY sense of proportion??? :wacko:

This is what makes having any sort of rational and balanced sense of discussion on the race with you so difficult and prickly.

Yep!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RuFF said:

Why don't you look up his accomplishments first, then ramble about rational and balanced. It's not hard to find things on Garcetti. 

And why don't you look up Hidalgo and Raggi before making a blanket and uninformed statement about them. I can assure you, they have a far higher profile even in this part of the world than the LA mayor does.

As I said, I have yet to see you having any sense of realistic perspective when you have your LA blinkers on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RuFF said:

Why don't you look up his accomplishments first, then ramble about rational and balanced. It's not hard to find things on Garcetti. 

Since you're the one who's so gung-ho on him, why don't YOU "list them", since you're the one who's OVERselling his "wonderful & impressive" accomplishments. Cuz without them, you're the one who's "rambling" on. Its not our job to look up what he's done, when you're the one praising him as some sort of god, which is absolutely ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, JesseSaenz said:

Exactly!

We had the President of the United States there and Chicago, his hometown, was eliminated in the first round of voting.

A crushing defeat and a national embarrassment that day.




 

 

And Brazil's paying the favor back with their years-long national embarrassments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, my sympathies and support are for Paris in this race. LA by itself just doesn't excite me.

But under normal circumstances, I'd be impressed by a plucky LA effort that has turned around the USOC's Boston embarrassment into becoming a genuine contender. I'd be praising their top notch marketing. I'd be calling this a real race now. And on my objective level - yes, I do own all those opinions still.

Yet, single handedly, Ruff so over-the-top LA-centricism and prickliness at anything that's less than total LA-worship has made me actively WANT it to fail now. And that's a pity. 

Edited by Sir Rols

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, paul said:

Garcetti is not great, did you see him at the DNC? 

 

Obama not great. Garcetti = Rock Star. The IOC makes no sense these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Yes, my sympathies an support are for Paris in this race. LA by itself just doesn't excite me.

But under normal circumstances, I'd be impressed by a lucky LA effort that has turned around the USOC's Boston embarrassment into becoming a genuine contender. I'd be praising their top notch marketing. I'd be calling this a real race now. And on my objective level - yes, I do own all those opinions still.

Yet, single handedly, Ruff so over-the-top LA-centricism and prickliness at anything hat's less than total LA-worship has made me actively WANT it to fail now. And that's a pity. 

If LA wins....which I can see them getting lucky and it happening...I'll be pissed. Paris deserves it. Paris should win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RuFF said:

Yea, I would rank Garcetti's accomplishments over Obamas. That's just me though. 

It's you.  As with Rols and FYI, if you actually believe that (as opposed to using a statement like that to troll an Internet forum), back it up.  You of all people who doesn't have enough wonderful things to say about LA you're going to toss that out there and then tell us to look up Garcetti?  Are you actively trying to not be taken seriously here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

Yes, my sympathies and support are for Paris in this race. LA by itself just doesn't excite me.

But under normal circumstances, I'd be impressed by a plucky LA effort that has turned around the USOC's Boston embarrassment into becoming a genuine contender. I'd be praising their top notch marketing. I'd be calling this a real race now. And on my objective level - yes, I do own all those opinions still.

Yet, single handedly, Ruff so over-the-top LA-centricism and prickliness at anything that's less than total LA-worship has made me actively WANT it to fail now. And that's a pity. 

This is what happens when you hang around GamesBids too much!

It's been said for awhile here - by Americans and non-Americans alike - that we'd like to see an Olympics here in a city that has hosted them yet.  For better or worse, that doesn't seem like it's going to happen.  New York and Chicago took their shots, but the timing worked out better for them than it did for the IOC.  So here we have LA.  In the right time and place, a very worthy option and I agree that what they're doing would look more impressive.  And they are doing all the rights things, but I don't think it will result in a win for them.  And I agree there will be a great deal of schadenfreude if LA loses and the narrative here is "OMG, LA is so perfect, how could the IOC be so stupid, they don't know what they're missing, I hate them now!"  As to which the IOC will reply "are you interested in 2028?"  And LA I believe will say of course we are.  Hopefully we won't have to endure all this all over again though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Stand by your opinion all you want, bcuz we actually don't care about it. But don't expect us to eat up all that hyperbole that you're spewing, especially when you're posting it here on Gamesbids of all places.

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

As to which the IOC will reply "are you interested in 2028?"  And LA I believe will say of course we are.  Hopefully we won't have to endure all this all over again though.

We won't. At least not to this extent (with a certain you know who). Bcuz the timing for a 2028 campaign would so much favor a North American (U.S.) bid if Europe does indeed wind up with the 2024 Games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RuFF said:

Quaker. Why would I do that? Just as you can say me of all people one could flip the coin. Why would I care is the greater question. Why do you care? Why are you guys wound up. If you don't agree, you don't agree. I could care less. Question is why do you care? And if it bugs you, it's your problem, not mine. I stand by my opinion. Sorry.

Why wouldn't you?  If you're going to throw out that Eric Garcetti is more accomplished than Barack Obama, don't just stand by your opinion, back it up.  Give us some insight why you believe that and if your response is "go look it up yourself," it just sounds like you're grandstanding for your guy.  What bugs me - and I know I'm not alone in saying this - is that you want us to take your insight and your discussion points at face value.  Really hard to do that when your complete lack of objectivity makes it seem like we're being trolled.  We'll remember that when you ask us to have a serious discussion about LA's Olympic bid with you.  That said..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RuFF said:

It appears you recognize the narrative, and I think hostorically it rings true. The only thing I'm not sure of is that LA will just say ok to 2028. I strongly believe people in LA are supportive of the Olympics... But I also feel the media is setting up another narrative. As much as you guys hate the "control the conversation" story, I think this is a perfect example of that. That very narrative you just described. However, given recent history with the movement and the mounting politics entering the games and with things such as Russia and doping, I don't know that the narrative in LA will remain the same. The very things Angelinos value about the Olympics are under threat, and could potentially tarnish the image Angelinos have of the games. LA84 has done an excellent job of quote unquote controlling the conversation (narrative) in LA, but I think the outside conversation is penetrating it and will probably have damaging effects on how Angelinos view the games. I wouldn't be surprised if the same is happening in Paris, Rome and Budapest. 

I always recognized the narrative.  I never disagreed with it from their standpoint.  You and I just don't see eye to eye on how that applies to their chances of winning.

As for the "conversation" (and no, I don't hate the story, I just think you try and take it to its own place), yes there are issues within the Olympic movement, some which apply to LA (the corruption of the IOC, all the problems with doping) and others that don't (socio-economic problems specific to Brazil are not a factor that would influence LA).  All of those are present right now and yet here's LA, as they have been for more than a decade now, willing to put themselves out there in hopes of landing another Olympics.  That's not going to chance and a loss in 2024 will not affect that.  If their views on the Olympic movement were headed in a bad direction, 2024 is not going to do much to affect that.

As for the media, who cares what they have to say?  Is this the same media that still have people here believing that Chicago's loss in 2016 was some sort of national embarrassment and that's what scared them off with their tail between their legs?  Yea, in the immediate aftermath of that vote, it was shocking for a U.S. bid to go out first.  But that's why I don't buy into the media perception.  Again, I don't doubt that there is some skepticism over what the Olympic movement is becoming and we've seen the cities that have been scared off by that.  I don't see that happening with LA though.  This is the city that claims to have saved the Olympics once upon a time.  Wouldn't they relish an opportunity to do so again?  Particularly if we're talking 2028 where the path to winning that vote could be a lot easier than it is right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RuFF said:

The USOC for 2024 is in a completely different position and any head of government that throws their support behind a solid US bid would be far more effective. 

Including Trump, eh?

Sorry, I thought I'd given up trying to engage with you, but that was just too easy a target to resist.

Edited by Sir Rols

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

Including Trump, eh?

Sorry, I thought I'd given up trying to engage with you, but that was just too easy a target to resist.

 

Every day the election seems to be breaking more and more Hillary's way so that shouldn't be a worry too soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

So you've seen a lot of Hidalgo and Raggi then? I must admit I haven't, but I hear they're pretty impressive women as well.

To be fair, if he can't outcharm and outflank Raggi - who doesn't even want the Olympics in Rome, then he's in trouble. Is she actually in Rio? With Budapest a huge outsider he's only really got Hidalgo as "competition".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where the hell did I say political figures don't have any influence? Go ahead, show me. Depending on the circumstances they can have a big influence. PM Blair played a huge and perhaps decisive factor in Singapore 2005 swinging it for London, for example. Four years later not even Obama's superstar power (and he was loved by the world then) could swing it to Chicago, It depends on the race. Where I've taken issue with you on your latest crusade is your notion that somehow Mayor Garcetti is a decisive factor that no other bid city can match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My French is not very good, but it appears 3 of the 4 candidate cities violated IOC rules in Rio by inviting international media into their bid houses??

They will be reprimended with Rome being comfirmed as one of the three.

No word yet on who the other two are.

http://www.francsjeux.com/2016/08/10/dans-la-course-aux-jeux-le-cio-fait-la-police/28673

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, RuFF said:

Just for reference I didn't say he puts the other bids to shame. I said that he likely puts the other mayors to shame.

It's this assumption that if LA has something/someone good, the other bids and their personnel are "likely" being "put to shame" that sounds so arrogant to people reading this. If you want to compare who is lining up for each bid, then it would be better if your posts read as if you knew anything about your city's bidding rivals. But they don't. I don't find your posts as annoying as some here but it's got to the point where I always have to assume you're over-exaggerating.

Anyway, I'm a little conscious you might feel like you're being ganged up on. Just dial down the boosterism and the weird assumptions like the above. I reckon you should be able to sell LA without all that, if it's really worthy of becoming an Olympic host city again.

Edited by Rob.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jesse Saenz said:

My French is not very good, but it appears 3 of the 4 candidate cities violated IOC rules in Rio by inviting international media into their bid houses??

They will be reprimended with Rome being comfirmed as one of the three.

No word yet on who the other two are.

http://www.francsjeux.com/2016/08/10/dans-la-course-aux-jeux-le-cio-fait-la-police/28673

The 3 cities would be Paris, Rome and LA. Apparently they recevied the media to visit their "bid house", which is considered promotion for the bid and forbidden by the IOC. The IOC sent an e-mail to warn the 3 cities. Nothing to worry about though.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...