2026 Olympics- Calgary votes no- 56%

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

being in power too long seems to change a lot of politicians. they forget where they came from. plus I think he always forgets while it's ok to be smarter than people, it's not ok to remind them of it.

I don't have much use for most politicians, but I think that a lot of people get into it in the hopes that its an easy life with huge benefits and a pension, and they don't realize til too late that it completely breaks them down.


You look at sitting Prime Ministers that lose the election, we always say the same thing. He didn't have the same fight in that last election.


It'll happen to Nenshi if he runs again.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I have my doubts that he'll run provincial, the Liberal Party is a dead brand. The NDP might get washed out in the next election and become political kryptonite in the next election.


He could run Federally, but he might want to take a break before he tries to run under the Liberal Brand Federally, they might not do well in Calgary after the next election.


He's kind of cornered a bit political career wise.

He’d still win in a downtown federal riding like Hehr’s even with a poor brand

[Oling_Roachinen]

Nenshi might be able to pull it off just because of name recognition, but Hehr won by 500 votes, 46% to 45%. It was still extremely tight before the Liberals' being hurt by the pipeline debacle (rightfully or wrongfully).

I don't think the Liberals/Hehr (forgetting his own issues) would have any chance at all to take that election today.

[Ozy_Flame]

Nenshi being the face of the federal Conservatives would actually do a world of good for that party.

[Joborule]

Nenshi stikes me more a micro more than a macro when it comes to politics. He doesn't strike as the type that's interested in running for provincial or federal politics, considering how much political gaming is involved on those level.

[ricosuave]

Saw this posted on Reddit, original Calgary 88 bid book from 1981.

LOL at the arena...

https://imgur.com/a/voBVkDx#wZUh6ef

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by ricosuave

Saw this posted on Reddit, original Calgary 88 bid book from 1981.

LOL at the arena...

https://imgur.com/a/voBVkDx#wZUh6ef

Looks ahead of its time and similar to Edmonton's new arena in concept outside of the glass roof opening which is ambitious today let alone then.

[RM14]

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...-remain-viable

Incredible how all the information that should have been given to the voters is still coming out.

I noticed the ski jump now has its lights off at night. COP looks weird driving by.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by RM14

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...-remain-viable

Incredible how all the information that should have been given to the voters is still coming out.

I noticed the ski jump now has its lights off at night. COP looks weird driving by.

That's not new information. In fact, that was the primary argument in favour of bidding.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by getbak

That's not new information. In fact, that was the primary argument in favour of bidding.

What I'm saying is that the average citizen didnt even understand the numbers

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by RM14

What I'm saying is that the average citizen didnt even understand the numbers

I don’t think you see a bid ever again in Calgary. If people said no to $400 million for $4 billion with 80% recycled facilities, what would rebuilding COP and the Oval cost?

Sure we may have a field house and arena by then but I am willing to bet those will be $400 mill in city money with another $400 million needed to rebuild the shutdown facilities totaling double the rejected offer.

The deals get worse from here sadly. The hard core no vote will be happy, but the “I want Olympics and hope they try again with a better deal” bloc will be sorely mistaken.

Feel laziness and anger did it in for good.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

I don’t think you see a bid ever again in Calgary. If people said no to $400 million for $4 billion with 80% recycled facilities, what would rebuilding COP and the Oval cost?

Sure we may have a field house and arena by then but I am willing to bet those will be $400 mill in city money with another $400 million needed to rebuild the shutdown facilities totaling double the rejected offer.

The deals get worse from here sadly. The hard core no vote will be happy, but the “I want Olympics and hope they try again with a better deal” bloc will be sorely mistaken.

Feel laziness and anger did it in for good.

It woulda been nice to see the bid that was going to be submitted to the IOC and, as presented in this thread the bid in 1988 was lackluster, and the actual result was much better. Hence the Saddledome became iconic rather than the original drawing.

[Barnet Flame]

An interesting and timely article from the BBC. There is only passing reference to Calgary and Sean Chu gets a quote.

My take from the views expressed in the article is that Calgary made a choice that others such as Boston made in the past and for the same reasons. It is something that really should make the IOC reevaluate how it approaches future bidding rounds. Or even if there are bidding rounds for future games.

The part about budgeting for the Games and the subsequent overspends makes sense. The programme to successfully deliver them is incredibly complex with a hard deadline to design, deliver and test facilities for readiness by a hard deadline. The cyclical nature and randomness of host locations mean successful jurisdictions have no recent programme and project management experience of preparing for an event. There are no lessons that can be learned and applied. Calgary can’t even use recent Games organising committees to learn from. Afterall, what can Calgary learn from recent hosts such as Sochi or soon to be Beijing?

Those Games are run in a completely different political, economic and social environment. The sort of environment that is toxic and yet, the potential future of these types of events unless there is a real will to change how these Games are run so they are attractive propositions for more communities.

Another take I have is that leaving aside the haphazard timing and reluctance of support from the top two levels of government, Calgary approached this bid in the correct manner, albeit a new hockey arena that could house a professional franchise could have enhanced it somewhat.

If the infrastructure to host a games isn’t there (facilities) in the first place, that is a good indicator there is/was no economic case for it prior to the Games, so why would you need it after the Games?

Calgary has a lot of what could be developed to run a successful games and the city’s approach to the bid, should hopefully be the future. Use and development of existing infrastructure so that they are used in a more sustainable way offers the greatest hope for the future of the Games.

Perhaps some day, the Games will be held in only a small number of cities with infrastructure present, developed and maintained. Maybe Calgary will be one of those cities.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-46236682

[redforever]

There is a pretty good editorial in the Herald yesterday, sort of a summary by David Legg, David J Finch, Norm O’Reilly as to what was learned from what they call Olympic sized errors.

One of the main problems they said was council taking over the bid process instead of a grass roots movement like in 1988.

And they also said that council basically took over the accounting and financial aspect of the bid, sort of shutting out the feds and province until late in the game.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by RM14

What I'm saying is that the average citizen didnt even understand the numbers

In fairness, the average citizen would never understand the numbers.

I know so many educated people, even folks with MBAs that simply have no clue about financials.

Not saying those numbers shouldn't be made available, just that if your bar is the average citizen. understanding the numbers... that bar is impossibly high.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by RM14

What I'm saying is that the average citizen didnt even understand the numbers

Doesn’t this mean that the average yes voter also didn’t understand the numbers? And if that is the case this was really a referendum on trust

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by GGG

Doesn’t this mean that the average yes voter also didn’t understand the numbers? And if that is the case this was really a referendum on trust

Dishonest NDP made funds subject to a plebiscite that they knew had little chance of success.

Feel bad for everyone that put so much time into this.

[Poster]

Originally Posted by LWcrowfoot

Well I mean the voting was close. 56-43 is pretty narrow, I wouldn't call that a blow out by any means. It might have been a clear victory, but it was close.

the YES side had 30% more votes than the NO side, thats not close by anyone's standards.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Poster

the YES side had 30% more votes than the NO side, thats not close by anyone's standards.

What?

[Husky]

Originally Posted by Weitz

What?

What he is trying to say is yes vote was 30% higher Then bo vote. 13 % into 43%