Brovane
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2001
- 5,641
- 1,908
- 136
Boston was not realistic in the first place. It's tiny, expensive, hard to get around, and loaded with people who didn't want the games.
LA is the only place in the US that should host the games since basically all the needed venues are in place, or will be soon due to other developments, and any required housing can be easily repurposed/reused/sold (probably at a profit).
The IOC is dreaming though if they think any US city is going to come to them on their hands an knees after sinking the Chicago 2016 bid so early and seemingly only wanting to award games to whoever agrees to blow the most cash on them. Fuck that shit.
There is more cities that just LA in the US that could host the summer games. Because of the of popularity of Professional sports and the strong College athletic programs in the US, that means that most major cities already have the venues in-place to host the Olympics. Atlanta if needed could easily host a Olympic games again. This also means that after a Olympics is over that the venues continue to be used instead of lying abandoned as we have seen with other countries.
