Jump to content

Polls instead of referendums: the Sapporo case study and its implications


Recommended Posts

Ive touched up on it in two other posts now, and Im thinking its a good enough talking point for its own thread (hopefully others agree).  But it seems like the IOC and Sapporo are going to battering ram this through with just a poll and looking to avoid the referendum at all costs for the 2030 WOGs.  The logic being the referendum is super high risk, and they already have a poll in the bag.......as shaky as it is, showing at least slight favor of the project.  The methodology and methods are a bit of a mystery, and they intend to keep it that way it looks like.  The pivotal referendum attempt was just shot down, with the local government saying it is "not necessary".  That was a pretty massive victory for Sapporo 2030 that I do not think can be understated.  

Personally, I think this is only going to work once.  This would never fly in North America or Europe.  But what a time to use that mulligan!  It comes at a pretty crucial time for the WOG movement.  We know SLC is looking increasingly like 2034 and the other 2030 options are coming apart at the seams.  I think nothing would bring Olympics fans greater joy than seeing that Sapporo 2030 SLC 2034 double lined up.  "Red Teaming" it, its not really a fair move, its certainly shrewd, and its a clever play of politics........but it could be a big W for Olympics fans if its pulled off.  

Can you think of anywhere else that would use this "poll as evidence" method?  I mean it would be irrelevant to an authoritarian regime like Turkey, China, Russia, etc.  But.......where could you see this flying for another winter, maybe even summer games?  Where else could a poll be rode out while blanketing over a referendum?  I think thats certainly an interesting discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it’s already been, heatedly, thrashed out in depth in the Sapporo news thread you’ve posted in. I think it’s just opening up another can of worms to start another one. It’ll likely anyway be absolutely flooded with the views of one particular poster, and just go the way of other threads where attempts to rationally and critically  discuss the pros and cons of the “New Norm” get shouted down. Pity that that poster has caused the board to come to this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

Ive touched up on it in two other posts now, and Im thinking its a good enough talking point for its own thread (hopefully others agree).  But it seems like the IOC and Sapporo are going to battering ram this through with just a poll and looking to avoid the referendum at all costs for the 2030 WOGs.  The logic being the referendum is super high risk, and they already have a poll in the bag.......as shaky as it is, showing at least slight favor of the project.  The methodology and methods are a bit of a mystery, and they intend to keep it that way it looks like.  The pivotal referendum attempt was just shot down, with the local government saying it is "not necessary".  That was a pretty massive victory for Sapporo 2030 that I do not think can be understated.  

Personally, I think this is only going to work once.  This would never fly in North America or Europe.  But what a time to use that mulligan!  It comes at a pretty crucial time for the WOG movement.  We know SLC is looking increasingly like 2034 and the other 2030 options are coming apart at the seams.  I think nothing would bring Olympics fans greater joy than seeing that Sapporo 2030 SLC 2034 double lined up.  "Red Teaming" it, its not really a fair move, its certainly shrewd, and its a clever play of politics........but it could be a big W for Olympics fans if its pulled off.  

Can you think of anywhere else that would use this "poll as evidence" method?  I mean it would be irrelevant to an authoritarian regime like Turkey, China, Russia, etc.  But.......where could you see this flying for another winter, maybe even summer games?  Where else could a poll be rode out while blanketing over a referendum?  I think thats certainly an interesting discussion.

It also worked for the last two Games awarded, Milano-Cortina 2026 and Brisbane 2032, both who went down the opnion polls/surveys path, with no public vote held.

Should Sapporo 2030 get up, they will be the 3rd Games Host in quick succession (following Milano-Cortina 2026 and Brisbane 2032) to have avoided a public vote and used polls/surveys to demonstrate majority public support to the satisfaction of the International Olympic Committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except both Milano-Cortina and Brisbane has significantly better and more credible poll results than Sapporo. Milano, at 85 per cent by the IOC’s independent survey, likely would have passed a referendum with ease. Brisbane also sat comfortably at 65 per cent in the best info I found. Again, far more comfortable than the 52 per cent of Sapporo’s most credible poll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, iceman530 said:

Basically, if Sapporo and the IOC push forward with this, they're red-lining it and biting their fingernails to the end I take it?  Its a risk.........but maybe an appealing one to take at this juncture?

It`s a dangerous risk. If numbers start to go south after Sapporo were to be awarded the 2030 Olympics, then you have a real possibility of a repeat of Denver 1976. In the era of the No Olympics crowd combined with worldwide inflation and high gas prices that show no signs of ebbing, I can see why an Olympics is a tough sell in some places right now, never mind the IOC`s lousy PR image. Don`t forget that Sapporo is coming off one of the priciest Olympics in history in Tokyo not mention an Olympics that was catastrophic in terms of financial losses. Of course some would say it doesn`t matter once a host city signs the supposed concrete host city contract, but realistically that is not true. There`s nothing that prevents a city from handing the Olympics back and saying no thanks, especially if a new local government (mayor or city council) takes office with the promise of either holding a referendum or campaigning on a No Olympics platform. 

Sure the IOC would be very angry and probably give that city a lashing that would make what they did with Oslo look like a reconciliation meeting, but that`s about all the IOC could do. Try to sue in court with CAS? Sure but that would be very costly in terms of both money and public relations not to mention would the IOC really be willing to burn bridges with one of the few countries in Asia that can realistically host an Olympics? I doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stryker said:

It`s a dangerous risk. If numbers start to go south after Sapporo were to be awarded the 2030 Olympics, then you have a real possibility of a repeat of Denver 1976. In the era of the No Olympics crowd combined with worldwide inflation and high gas prices that show no signs of ebbing, I can see why an Olympics is a tough sell in some places right now, never mind the IOC`s lousy PR image. Don`t forget that Sapporo is coming off one of the priciest Olympics in history in Tokyo not mention an Olympics that was catastrophic in terms of financial losses. Of course some would say it doesn`t matter once a host city signs the supposed concrete host city contract, but realistically that is not true. There`s nothing that prevents a city from handing the Olympics back and saying no thanks, especially if a new local government (mayor or city council) takes office with the promise of either holding a referendum or campaigning on a No Olympics platform. 

Sure the IOC would be very angry and probably give that city a lashing that would make what they did with Oslo look like a reconciliation meeting, but that`s about all the IOC could do. Try to sue in court with CAS? Sure but that would be very costly in terms of both money and public relations not to mention would the IOC really be willing to burn bridges with one of the few countries in Asia that can realistically host an Olympics? I doubt it.

No, you don't.  Japan's economy didn't take a major hit because of the Olympics.  And the money they didn't bring in because they weren't able to sell tickets was somewhat offset in money that they saved not having to have as many people on hand working at the venues.

You say there's nothing that prevents a city from handing the Olympics back, but that applies to any city/country.  You're absolutely right about what happens if a new government comes into play.  Again, that's hardly just a Sapporo issue.  We've seen hosts experience severe economic hardships as a result of agreeing to host the Olympics.  But that's never caused a city to rip up the host city contract.  As I mentioned in the other thread, the 1 city that did was a matter of poor planning.  The city of recent vintage that reminds me the most of them is Boston.  That bid was announced as the USOC nominee, but they crumbled because of piss poor management in a very similar vein to why Denver failed.  Thank goodness it fell apart early enough to allow LA sub in while the IOC was still accepting bids.

I saw a lot of posts in the lead-up to Tokyo about what recourse they or the IOC had if the Tokyo organizers said they weren't going to have the Olympics.  The somewhat vague responses were mostly that the IOC would hold their feet to the fire in terms of sponsorship contracts, but it'd likely be tied up in court for years before there was any sort of resolution.  Who knows how the IOC would react if they were put in the position of a lover scorned.  It would almost certainly be worse for the Olympic movement than it would be for the city/country involved, especially if there was a scramble to find a replacement host.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IOC should dial back the longtime tradition of summer and - less so - winter games always having to go to totally different cities in totally different countries. So whether a Sapporo or SLC, the Olympics should focus on past hosts, fewer hosts and stick with them instead of running a continuously traveling circus..

It's wasteful IMO to keep making City/Country A or City/Country B have to do a long, complicated audition routine, and spend so much time and money for what's mainly a two-week-long sports event. Moreover, an event that happens only once every four years, so the Olympics is further diluted for a host city.

I see recent Olympic games as being more and more stripped of some of the supposed prestige of Pierre de Coubertin's old-time legacy. That old guy - even though he was from France - may barely be mentioned in 2024. I can see a lot of participants at the next summer games going, "Who's he? Who cares? Wasn't he some old white guy. (Yawn). Next!"

Meanwhile, a lot of TV viewers in today's world increasingly want exciting TikTok moments. If the IOC has to keep pitting would-be hosts against other would-be hosts, maybe they can have the mayors, presidents, prime ministers and leaders of chambers of commerce of those places come out and do a  knock-down, bare-knuckle brawl.

Two men enter, one man leaves. Or two women enter, one woman leaves. Or whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going by their most recent numbers, they may not even need a referendum to sink it.

According to a new survey by Leger, 34 per cent of respondents across the Canadian province from December 17 to 19 said they support a possible bid to host the 2030 Games while 35 per cent oppose the project and the remaining 31 per cent are neutral.

The new results are similar to those of a poll taken by Research Co. in October that revealed a similar split of 43 per cent in favor of a bid with 45 per cent against and 12 per cent undecided.  

Source: GamesBids

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

Vancouver seem to be backing right away from holding a referendum.

Interesting to see that article cite quotes from Jules Boykoff, who is about as anti-Olympics as you can get.

4 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Going by their most recent numbers, they may not even need a referendum to sink it.

According to a new survey by Leger, 34 per cent of respondents across the Canadian province from December 17 to 19 said they support a possible bid to host the 2030 Games while 35 per cent oppose the project and the remaining 31 per cent are neutral.

The new results are similar to those of a poll taken by Research Co. in October that revealed a similar split of 43 per cent in favor of a bid with 45 per cent against and 12 per cent undecided.  

Source: GamesBids

Not a good sign for the IOC if Vancouver has such little support, especially since this would make for 2 cities in Canada that potentially couldn't even get themselves to the starting line.  And once again, here's a city that seems like they want to avoid a referendum at all costs because they know the outcome will tell them what they don't want to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Olympics2028 said:

The IOC should dial back the longtime tradition of summer and - less so - winter games always having to go to totally different cities in totally different countries. So whether a Sapporo or SLC, the Olympics should focus on past hosts, fewer hosts and stick with them instead of running a continuously traveling circus..

It's wasteful IMO to keep making City/Country A or City/Country B have to do a long, complicated audition routine, and spend so much time and money for what's mainly a two-week-long sports event. Moreover, an event that happens only once every four years, so the Olympics is further diluted for a host city.

I see recent Olympic games as being more and more stripped of some of the supposed prestige of Pierre de Coubertin's old-time legacy. That old guy - even though he was from France - may barely be mentioned in 2024. I can see a lot of participants at the next summer games going, "Who's he? Who cares? Wasn't he some old white guy. (Yawn). Next!"

Meanwhile, a lot of TV viewers in today's world increasingly want exciting TikTok moments. If the IOC has to keep pitting would-be hosts against other would-be hosts, maybe they can have the mayors, presidents, prime ministers and leaders of chambers of commerce of those places come out and do a  knock-down, bare-knuckle brawl.

Two men enter, one man leaves. Or two women enter, one woman leaves. Or whatever.

Okay, let's unpack a couple of things here.  The process of bidding for an Olympics now is a lot less complication and resource-consuming than it used to be, so the IOC has made major improvements on that front.  If a city wants to host the Olympics, they do need to prove their worthiness, so that's never going to be a simple matter.

You say the IOC should focus on past hosts.  Well, look at Canada.  Calgary considered bidding for 2026, but public support wasn't there.  Vancouver seems to be struggling on that front as well.  That's 2 cities having hosted more recently than Sapporo who are struggling to put another bid together.  At the end of the day, the IOC doesn't get to dictate who is interested in the Olympics.  It's the same refrain we've brought up here for years.. they can only choose from the cities that present themselves for a bid.  Cities/countries might not want to spend billions of dollars for one Olympics and then have the appetite to do it again less than 20 or so years later.  Salt Lake is probably an exception to that rule, but they seem to be an outlier.

As far as the legacy of the Olympics.. that's society and especially sports in general these days.  Someone who is under the age of 30 never saw Michael Jordan in his prime, so who is he to a new generation of basketball fans?  Let alone the past greats of the game?  The Olympics used to be a novelty as a gathering of people from throughout the world in 1 time and place.  With social media, that's no longer as unique.  There's little value in "old time legacy" compared to, yes, becoming an influencer on social media.  I know you scoff at that idea, but that's the state of the world these days.  I've seen more than a few people question whether or not there should still be an Olympics and does it make sense in today's world.  It's a fair question, but I think part of the response is that the "prestige" level will never be what it was.  Not because of the lack of choirs or whatever other nonsense you think is missing, but because we live in a world with information overload, so it's hard for a once-every-four-years event where literally every last second is broadcast around the world in real time to stand out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

As far as the legacy of the Olympics.. that's society and especially sports in general these days.  Someone who is under the age of 30 never saw Michael Jordan in his prime, so who is he to a new generation of basketball fans?  Let alone the past greats of the game?  The Olympics used to be a novelty as a gathering of people from throughout the world in 1 time and place.  With social media, that's no longer as unique.  There's little value in "old time legacy" compared to, yes, becoming an influencer on social media.  I know you scoff at that idea, but that's the state of the world these days.  I've seen more than a few people question whether or not there should still be an Olympics and does it make sense in today's world.  It's a fair question, but I think part of the response is that the "prestige" level will never be what it was.  Not because of the lack of choirs or whatever other nonsense you think is missing, but because we live in a world with information overload, so it's hard for a once-every-four-years event where literally every last second is broadcast around the world in real time to stand out

 

I don't care for dismissing my take on an aspect of a public event as "nonsense."

Look at the traditions that surround the monarchy of Great Britain, including the recent celebration of 70 years of reign. I bet if the format used for most public presentations surrounding Elizabeth were changed to be similar to the 2012 Olympics, a lot of the sense of honor, dignity and prestige would go the wayside. Even without the controversies surrounding her children and grandchildren.

Think of the recent celebrations in London if they had included a segment where the monarch was made to look like she parachuted out of a helicopter and then landed on the roof of Buckingham Palace. 

Sure, a great time still would have been had by all. But re-creating Elizabeth getting a pie in the face could be a fun moment too.

But you're correct about "that's society....in general these days."

Aspects of a Meghan/Harry/Uncle Andrew, Will/Jada, Johnny/Amber go back a long time. But they and the trends around them are now bubbling to the surface, not kept mainly below it. Hey, some of that is even reflected in a message board like gamesbid.com.

More and more people are becoming flat-out nuts, freaks and flakes in 2022.

The 2024 organizing committee had better hope such trends don't get too hilarious two years from now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Olympics2028 said:

Think of the recent celebrations in London if they had included a segment where the monarch was made to look like she parachuted out of a helicopter and then landed on the roof of Buckingham Palace. 

Sure, a great time still would have been had by all. But re-creating Elizabeth getting a pie in the face could be a fun moment too.

You do know the jubilee celebrations included a clip of Her Majesty with Paddington Bear, don’t you?

 

And, no, you’re sh!t with choirs and flagpoles and stuff is indeed nonsense…

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2022 at 11:54 AM, Olympics2028 said:

I don't care for dismissing my take on an aspect of a public event as "nonsense."

Look at the traditions that surround the monarchy of Great Britain, including the recent celebration of 70 years of reign. I bet if the format used for most public presentations surrounding Elizabeth were changed to be similar to the 2012 Olympics, a lot of the sense of honor, dignity and prestige would go the wayside. Even without the controversies surrounding her children and grandchildren.

Think of the recent celebrations in London if they had included a segment where the monarch was made to look like she parachuted out of a helicopter and then landed on the roof of Buckingham Palace. 

Sure, a great time still would have been had by all. But re-creating Elizabeth getting a pie in the face could be a fun moment too.

But you're correct about "that's society....in general these days."

Aspects of a Meghan/Harry/Uncle Andrew, Will/Jada, Johnny/Amber go back a long time. But they and the trends around them are now bubbling to the surface, not kept mainly below it. Hey, some of that is even reflected in a message board like gamesbid.com.

More and more people are becoming flat-out nuts, freaks and flakes in 2022.

The 2024 organizing committee had better hope such trends don't get too hilarious two years from now.

It's posts like these I can't quite tell if you're just being overly sardonic or you simply choose not to understand why an event like the Olympics isn't presented the way you want it to be.  And LOL that you seem to have the same selective memory of the celebrations of the Queen that you make it seem like elements of pop culture have no place, lest they take away from the dignity and honor.

How much of their ceremonies did the present that people will remember as being uniquely British, whether it was the James Bond bit or the NHS segment or the closing ceremony turning into a rock concert.  They did these things because they're memorable and meaningful.  A choir is not.  You seem to want to pick out the most outrageous moments that trended on social media (again, not sure if that's biting sarcasm or more a "hey, let's do the exact opposite of what I think, because that's what the people clearly want, amirite?!") and think those will resonate.  Again, 6 years from now, no one will be talking about Will Smith and Chris Rock from the 2022 Oscars anymore.

That all said, there's a reason why sports like skateboarding and surfing are in the Olympics.  They're trying to reach a younger demographic.  Not the audience that remembers the Olympics of yesteryear before changing media influenced how the world functions and people's short attention spans mean they care little about prestige and dignity as markers of value.  You say more people are crazy in 2022.  That's not untrue, but yea, that's the world we live in.  And it's not a terrible thing if we normalize these things rather than being the old fuddy duddy who pines for "well, back in my day before kids spent all day staring at their screens."

To tie a bow on this.. the number of people in the world, and especially in the United States, who hold the Olympics in the same high regard as they did 30 or 40 years ago is shrinking.  That's an unavoidable fact of life that in an age of instant gratification social media where the uniqueness of a world gathering of the best athletes isn't what it used to be.  It didn't happen because the Olympics lost their honor and dignity compared to what they were in an era where they were only 3 TV networks in the United States that truly mattered and "Wide World of Sports" was a true novelty.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...