Jump to content

Boston 2024 Olympic Games Backers Want State-Wide Referendum


GBModerator
 Share

Recommended Posts

Backers of Boston’s bid for the 2024 Summer Olympic Games said Tuesday they want a state-wide referendum in 2016 on whether a bid should go forward, Reuters reports, adding that they would abandon any attempt for a bid without majority support state-wide and in Boston. The proposal was made by John Fish, a construction executive […]

View the full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is stupid. If the games are not a statewide event then the rest of Massachusetts should have no say on the games. I think this is an attempt to increase the popularity of the bid since current polls are showing support for the bid is lacking among Boston residents. I think it might actually work to improve poll numbers too since someone on the far west of Massachusetts won't care either way what happens to the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should if they have to help pay for it. And they almost certainly will.

That I agree with, but I think even that will backfire. How many people do you think will want to vote for a games and help pay for it if they'll never even get a chance to attend them or reap the benefits of such games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great! This is WONDERFUL! Nothing like submitting a bid to the IOC and holding a referendum afterwards, a referendum that will ultimately result in Boston having to withdraw its bid. That's not embarrassing for the US AT ALL.


It also makes no sense given they said they would not submit a bid if the public didn't want it, but that is exactly what they are doing...submitting a bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of you make excellent points. I agree it would be humiliating to submit the bid then withdraw. The USOC and the Boston Organizing committee knew from jump that Boston didn't have local support for this bid. I feel as though that referendums and polls should be done before a city jumps into a race not after they present themselves on the world stage as a country's candidate city. Especially when the time is ripe for a US olympics. It's crazy to me that after the embarrassment of the shock eliminations of New York and Chicago. You finally have a fighting chance and now you decide to go with a city that quintessentially doesn't want to host an Olympics.

And to the point where they plan to put it on the ballot in 2016, well here's the issue on that folks, peoples's minds will be focused even more on the economy and government spending like that just won't look attractive to the more educated voter much less the ones on hard times. This bid is dead in the water.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I urge you, most earnestly, to desist - immediately - from this fuss since this trajectory of thinking - confidently repositioning what should obviously be the first process to second procedural position - is a notoriously expected feature of Bostonian political and administrative thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I urge you, most earnestly, to desist - immediately - from this fuss since this trajectory of thinking - confidently repositioning what should obviously be the first process to second procedural position - is a notoriously expected feature of Bostonian political and administrative thought.

?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been a number of AI programs designed to submit gibberish papers to academic journals and see if they get published. Somewhere out there is a programmer who is very angry with Gamesbids for criticizing the Olympics at Sochi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At what point does the USOC realize this was a huge mistake? Why spend all the time and money and then have the bid sunk by a referendum the following year? Makes no sense whatsoever. Either the USOC tells Boston it's not going to work out and they try to get Los Angeles to replace it or they forget about 2024 (probably the smarter choice) and start planning for 2028.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think LA will have more support than Boston? And wasn't farmer's field a key piece of the LA bid?

Does something make you think they wouldn't? There were some warning signs with regards to Boston's support levels before they got picked as the USOC's choice, so it's not like it came out of left field that it would be an issue.

Do we know for sure that LA's Olympic efforts will be supported? We don't, but I give them better odds than the other cities. Plus, we've seen a glimpse of their general concept (yea yea, I know.. it was just a leak so can we really put much into it) and it seems a lot stronger than Boston's. Farmer's Field is not an issue because that whole plan has been in flux for years and their still may be a new NFL facility build somewhere that could be a part of a bid.

You've said enough times you thought LA was the clear choice ahead of Boston. There are still a lot of unknowns with them, but if the question is what makes you think LA will have more support than Boston? Even though it's probably a moot point, for those here (yourself included) who thought that LA would be a better choice than Boston, certainly the fact they would have support was a big part of that assumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just thinking the only way the USOC could look more idiotic is to take the "bid" away from Boston due to lack of support, then give it to LA, only to find out there isn't support in LA either.

I have to idea what support is like in LA. I have no idea what kind of opposition will spring up. I do know it would be a good idea for the USOC to find out if they are even thinking of moving the bid there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just thinking the only way the USOC could look more idiotic is to take the "bid" away from Boston due to lack of support, then give it to LA, only to find out there isn't support in LA either.

I have to idea what support is like in LA. I have no idea what kind of opposition will spring up. I do know it would be a good idea for the USOC to find out if they are even thinking of moving the bid there.

Is anyone with the USOC actually thinking that or is it just people here making that suggestion? The USOC worked with LA for nearly 2 years. Granted, they should have known what was brewing in Boston before they selected them and this became an issue, but I'd like to think they have some basis of how Los Angeles feels toward an Olympic bid, particularly since they were in the mix for 2016

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This probably doesn't mean much, but most of the people that were tweeting about the USOC selection were from California and before the selection there was never any strong or weak opposition to LA's bid. We knew (and I remember people complaining about this) that Boston not only had opposition, but that it was well supported and very organized. I remember some people saying, "Wow, good job USOC in picking the only city with organized opposition" or something along those lines.


However, I think going from Boston to LA would make the USOC look incompetent (which it is) and would honestly be more embarrassing then just dropping from the race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This probably doesn't mean much, but most of the people that were tweeting about the USOC selection were from California and before the selection there was never any strong or weak opposition to LA's bid. We knew (and I remember people complaining about this) that Boston not only had opposition, but that it was well supported and very organized. I remember some people saying, "Wow, good job USOC in picking the only city with organized opposition" or something along those lines.

However, I think going from Boston to LA would make the USOC look incompetent (which it is) and would honestly be more embarrassing then just dropping from the race.

Whatever they do, and I think Boston is probably dead, they need to do it SOONER rather than later and put this behind them.

The longer it drags on, and it gets closer to the submission deadlines, the worse it will look. People will forget Boston pretty quickly , since it has no momentum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would also be a huge blow to the IOC if after all those European cities scared away, the US would also begin to question the benefits of Olympic hosting.

So, I guess there's quite a few parties interested in keeping Boston in the race.

As much as it would look bad for a lot of people for Boston to drop out, it wouldn't be the same huge blow that the IOC experienced for 2022. When all those European cities dropped out, they were left with Beijing and Almaty as their only options. Without Boston for 2024, the IOC still has Hamburg and potentially a couple of other good options. So they're not in such terrible shape without Boston.

Plus, I think what's happening with Boston is an indictment against them and the USOC then it is about American cities shying away the Olympics. Who knows if the situation would be the same if this was San Fran or LA involved. To me, this is about 1 specific city (which perhaps shouldn't have been selected in the first place) and their particular issues rather than something that is more about the United States. Which is to say.. I don't think what's happening in Boston would necessarily affect other US cities, particularly those involved in this domestic bid race. Although it does present an issue of how citizens would react.

That aside, the concept of "benefits of Olympic hosting" is something that is very situational. A city in the right time and place can put a plan together. Sometimes, that's not going to happen though. I've said for awhile that Boston in this bid may not be the selection the USOC is looking for. And that's to say nothing of tepid support levels. Either way, I still look at this as an isolated incident. We'll have to see how it plays out, but aside from what the implications are for the USOC, I don't think it will have a lasting effect on other cities, American or otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would also be a huge blow to the IOC if after all those European cities scared away, the US would also begin to question the benefits of Olympic hosting.

So, I guess there's quite a few parties interested in keeping Boston in the race.

Oh come on, no, this 2024 race is nothing like 2022. If Boston drops out, none of the other biding cities would drop out, on the contrary, it would make it like a Eurpoean race and this would be freaking exciting. Paris is enjoying the possibility of Boston dropping out to be honest. It's giving them all the more chance to get those Games, FINALLY!!! (Yes, we've been bidding so many times lately, what's wrong with Paris? Please give s the games, it's been 100 years, and we won't bother you the IOC for another 100 years, so.....COME ON!!!!!!!!!!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as it would look bad for a lot of people for Boston to drop out, it wouldn't be the same huge blow that the IOC experienced for 2022. When all those European cities dropped out, they were left with Beijing and Almaty as their only options. Without Boston for 2024, the IOC still has Hamburg and potentially a couple of other good options. So they're not in such terrible shape without Boston.

Plus, I think what's happening with Boston is an indictment against them and the USOC then it is about American cities shying away the Olympics. Who knows if the situation would be the same if this was San Fran or LA involved. To me, this is about 1 specific city (which perhaps shouldn't have been selected in the first place) and their particular issues rather than something that is more about the United States. Which is to say.. I don't think what's happening in Boston would necessarily affect other US cities, particularly those involved in this domestic bid race. Although it does present an issue of how citizens would react.

That aside, the concept of "benefits of Olympic hosting" is something that is very situational. A city in the right time and place can put a plan together. Sometimes, that's not going to happen though. I've said for awhile that Boston in this bid may not be the selection the USOC is looking for. And that's to say nothing of tepid support levels. Either way, I still look at this as an isolated incident. We'll have to see how it plays out, but aside from what the implications are for the USOC, I don't think it will have a lasting effect on other cities, American or otherwise.

I doesn't matter who the city is in this case. What matters is that the US, the IOC's biggest partner and the worlds most powerful country, would begin questioning the merits of hosting the games. If the IOC's biggest partner doesn't even want the games why should any other country? That's the way most people around the world will see it. I doesn't matter if the city is Boston or Tulsa, any US drop out amongst the background of the 2022 race will look very bad for the IOC regardless of what US city it is.

Oh come on, no, this 2024 race is nothing like 2022. If Boston drops out, none of the other biding cities would drop out, on the contrary, it would make it like a Eurpoean race and this would be freaking exciting. Paris is enjoying the possibility of Boston dropping out to be honest. It's giving them all the more chance to get those Games, FINALLY!!! (Yes, we've been bidding so many times lately, what's wrong with Paris? Please give s the games, it's been 100 years, and we won't bother you the IOC for another 100 years, so.....COME ON!!!!!!!!!!)

In all honesty, Paris never had any real competition coming from Boston. Your biggest competition at this point is maybe Hamburg or Rome, but this is almost like the 2020 race. There is only one option for the IOC that actually makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doesn't matter who the city is in this case. What matters is that the US, the IOC's biggest partner and the worlds most powerful country, would begin questioning the merits of hosting the games. If the IOC's biggest partner doesn't even want the games why should any other country? That's the way most people around the world will see it. I doesn't matter if the city is Boston or Tulsa, any US drop out amongst the background of the 2022 race will look very bad for the IOC regardless of what US city it is.

In all honesty, Paris never had any real competition coming from Boston. Your biggest competition at this point is maybe Hamburg or Rome, but this is almost like the 2020 race. There is only one option for the IOC that actually makes sense.

If Boston was never serious competition to a city like Paris, then why is it such a big deal if they're no longer in the picture? I understand the argument about the 2022 race, but the circumstances behind this one are not the same, so it's an unfair picture to paint to consider this an extension of that. The 2022 cities that dropped out were an indictment against the IOC, particularly in the wake of Sochi. What's left after those cities are gone is a giant douche and a turd sandwich. And certainly Oslo and Stockholm would have easily beaten either. Krakow probably as well. You can't say the same about Boston, so as much as it will be notable if they drop out, it's going to fade into the background and the USOC is probably going to dust themselves off and come right back at it for 2028.

What people around the world see is not always that accurate with the reality of the situation. Anyone with any knowledge of Olympic bidding is going to know that this is about Boston, not about the United States. The USOC is clearly eager to bid for 2024. They had multiple cities that were interested. It's going to make them look really bad that they chose Boston when they could have looked elsewhere. To me, that's the immediate reaction to a situation where Boston drops out. It's not "wow, the United States doesn't want the Olympics, other countries are going to start questioning the Olympics" That's not going to happen. Particularly from bidders who stand a better chance of getting the Olympics than they do anyway.

When we talk about the benefits or merits of Olympic hosting, those come with some very serious risks. It's possible for an Olympics to be a good thing for a city. But there's also a good chance it doesn't go so well and it was a mistake to have tried. And that's not something new that has only become a concern in recent years. That's why big cities aren't all chomping at the bit to try and win over the IOC. Hosting an Olympics doesn't always make sense in a particular time and place. I'm far from convinced that 2024 and Boston is it. So that this could fall apart is more about the USOC giving them an opportunity when they shouldn't have, just as many Chicago and 2016 wasn't right nor was New York and 2012 (although I'll still argue it was the right time for the city, just not for the IOC to accept them). That should be the take-away from what's happening with Boston. The USOC screwed up and they need to live with that decision. This one isn't on the IOC and I don't think other cities/countries will look at Boston and be dissuaded from bidding. Maybe that's how some here will see it and what some false public perception could lead to. Still don't believe it will have wider implications outside of Boston or the United States.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Boston was never serious competition to a city like Paris, then why is it such a big deal if they're no longer in the picture? I understand the argument about the 2022 race, but the circumstances behind this one are not the same, so it's an unfair picture to paint to consider this an extension of that. The 2022 cities that dropped out were an indictment against the IOC, particularly in the wake of Sochi. What's left after those cities are gone is a giant douche and a turd sandwich. And certainly Oslo and Stockholm would have easily beaten either. Krakow probably as well. You can't say the same about Boston, so as much as it will be notable if they drop out, it's going to fade into the background and the USOC is probably going to dust themselves off and come right back at it for 2028.

What people around the world see is not always that accurate with the reality of the situation. Anyone with any knowledge of Olympic bidding is going to know that this is about Boston, not about the United States. The USOC is clearly eager to bid for 2024. They had multiple cities that were interested. It's going to make them look really bad that they chose Boston when they could have looked elsewhere. To me, that's the immediate reaction to a situation where Boston drops out. It's not "wow, the United States doesn't want the Olympics, other countries are going to start questioning the Olympics" That's not going to happen. Particularly from bidders who stand a better chance of getting the Olympics than they do anyway.

When we talk about the benefits or merits of Olympic hosting, those come with some very serious risks. It's possible for an Olympics to be a good thing for a city. But there's also a good chance it doesn't go so well and it was a mistake to have tried. And that's not something new that has only become a concern in recent years. That's why big cities aren't all chomping at the bit to try and win over the IOC. Hosting an Olympics doesn't always make sense in a particular time and place. I'm far from convinced that 2024 and Boston is it. So that this could fall apart is more about the USOC giving them an opportunity when they shouldn't have, just as many Chicago and 2016 wasn't right nor was New York and 2012 (although I'll still argue it was the right time for the city, just not for the IOC to accept them). That should be the take-away from what's happening with Boston. The USOC screwed up and they need to live with that decision. This one isn't on the IOC and I don't think other cities/countries will look at Boston and be dissuaded from bidding. Maybe that's how some here will see it and what some false public perception could lead to. Still don't believe it will have wider implications outside of Boston or the United States.

Boston itself as a city was never a threat, and in voting Boston did not stand a chance against Paris. However, I think that If Boston drops the media will not report it as Boston dropping but instead they will report it as the USA dropping. When you say that the US doesn't even want the games you get an entirely different story then just a Beta US city dropping from a race.

The USA dropping is a more dramatic story to tell then Boston dropping, and if you think that the opposition groups in any of the other cities are not going to talk about a Boston drop in the context of the whole nation saying no to the games then you don't understand the tactics of those types of groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boston itself as a city was never a threat, and in voting Boston did not stand a chance against Paris. However, I think that If Boston drops the media will not report it as Boston dropping but instead they will report it as the USA dropping. When you say that the US doesn't even want the games you get an entirely different story then just a Beta US city dropping from a race.

The USA dropping is a more dramatic story to tell then Boston dropping, and if you think that the opposition groups in any of the other cities are not going to talk about a Boston drop in the context of the whole nation saying no to the games then you don't understand the tactics of those types of groups.

Just wanted to write more or less the same thing...the international story will not be "USOC's wrong choice dropped out of race", it will be "US bid fails because even Americans don't want Olympics anymore". That's pretty much a scenario the IOC cannot want, as false a perception as it may be.

It's a bit similar to what happened with Munich 2022: The No campaign here was heavily fuelled, not only by the Sochi gigantomania which in fact was a total contradiction to the far more sustainable Munich concept (talking about false perceptions...), but also by the earlier Swiss referendum. It was some sort of a domino effect.

And I don't believe for a split second that a Paris bid would survive if smart No campaigners used Boston as an argument, along with the current socio-economic climate in France, to create a momentum in polls that would be less supportive than it seems now. Same for Hamburg, btw.

This is not just about an internal wrong choice by USOC, it has potential effects for international bids as well.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...