Romney’s Remarks on Olympics Cause Stir in London

OP

WTF? Holy hyperbole, Batman!

Saying you have some concerns about the preperations of an event - an opinion echoed in the mainstream media - is nothing like calling for genocide. :rolleyes:

Just an example, albeit an extreme one :tongue:

none the less it is somewhat offensive what he said especially considering, as aforementioned, the last time they held the Olympics it got bombed...

Reply 21

sugar-n-spice

1

Not nearly as smart as David Cameron thinks; Obama is the president of the country which hosted the Salt Lake city events not Romney (even if it was Romney who played a key role in them).

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 22

Super Cicero

18

Original post by sugar-n-spice

Not nearly as smart as David Cameron thinks; Obama is the president of the country which hosted the Salt Lake city events not Romney.

(for now anyway)

What??

1. The Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City were held in 2002 when Bush was president, not Obama.

2. Mitt Romney was in charge of the 2002 Olympic Games, that's what Cameron was implying when he said about running a games in the middle of nowhere.

Reply 23

sugar-n-spice

1

Original post by Super Cicero

What??

1. The Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City were held in 2002 when Bush was president, not Obama.

2. Mitt Romney was in charge of the 2002 Olympic Games, that's what Cameron was implying when he said about running a games in the middle of nowhere.

All very true but it was an attack on America on the whole, even though Romney doesn't represent America. Obama isn't as Anglo-phillic as Bush so it could be damaging considering we need them more than they need us.

Reply 24

sugar-n-spice

1

He should have ignored it, Romney isn't president it's not like his opinion matters, but making remarks about an American hosted games whoever was overseeing its running was dumb.

Reply 25

gateshipone

10

Original post by sugar-n-spice

All very true but it was an attack on America on the whole, even though Romney doesn't represent America. Obama isn't as Anglo-phillic as Bush so it could be damaging considering we need them more than they need us.

It clearly wasn't. It was aimed directly at Romney and was a direct reference to the role he played in Salt Lake City...

Reply 26

sugar-n-spice

1

Original post by gateshipone

It clearly wasn't. It was aimed directly at Romney and was a direct reference to the role he played in Salt Lake City...

Romney's remarks were an attack on the Blair government for choosing to host them in London rather than in the Highlands of Scotland where there's a bit more space.

Just pointing out the inconsistency here; David Cameron reacts to a comment as if it was a personal insult for decisions which were not his, but Obama won't do the same. :cookie:

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 27

MagicNMedicine

20

Why has Cameron felt the need to get defensive about it?

The private security firm not having enough people is a major problem.

The whole argument "well we're hosting it in one of the biggest cities in the world so there's bound to be problems" doesn't wash. If you can't deliver it don't bid for it. I bet when the UK was bidding for these games they were reassuring the international Olympic Committee about how our infrastructure is second to none and we could deal with the challenges that hosting in a major city provides.

The Chinese had enough security for the games in Beijing so we should have enough security for the games in London. Unfortunately we gave the contract to a private firm - at a very big price - that wasn't up to the job.

I don't think Romney has said anything wrong here however the fact that everybody has immediately reacted by jumping on him doesn't bode well for him because it suggests that he is seen as a non entity with no right to voice his opinion. Clinton or Obama would have dealt with the question better.

Reply 28

Endless Blue

19

Mitt Romney is a complete Moron...

I mean Mormon. Definitely a Mormon.

Reply 29

Libertarian_Walrus

Funny how the whole country has been worried about being unprepared for the olympics, Mitt Romney says it and everyone has a go at him. Hypocrites. I don't even like Romney but he has said nothing wrong.

Reply 30

rmpr97

10

Fair enough he said some good points, although they a) came across as hypocritical because this is London, not bloody Salt Lake, and b) It's not his position to say considering he's trying to improve foreign relations. It's like me trying to be friends with you and then calling you a fat cut. Not gonna work too well.

Reply 31

amyelizabeth2681

Village idiot indeed. What I find funny is that he came here to try to find sponsors and support for his presidential campaign back home. He also did it to show Americans he can outmanoeuvre Obama when it comes to international relations. Lol takes a true talent to somehow flush those two things down the toilet simultaneously with ONE remark. Bravo :congrats:

Reply 32

cl_steele

OP

2

Original post by Libertarian_Walrus

Funny how the whole country has been worried about being unprepared for the olympics, Mitt Romney says it and everyone has a go at him. Hypocrites. I don't even like Romney but he has said nothing wrong.

Its more the fact its a] none of his business b] not appropriate to insult your host country barely a day into his trip and then proceed to let fly 3 more questionable remarks

Reply 33

jumpingjesusholycow

18

Cameron was spot on with this one, but come on. A 'stir'? All he did was call it 'disconcerting'. As far as negative opinions of the 2012 Olympics go, it doesn't really get much more beige than that.

Reply 34

Scootaloo

Hey at least it's an improvement from:

"Who let the dogs out?!"

Oh Mitt...Or should I say Willard

Reply 35

Spaz Man

13

He's a Republican. He would have wanted the free market to organsie the Olympics. They did to an extent and messed up. He then promptly criticises it *facepalm*

Reply 36

cl_steele

OP

2

A commentor on the article made a rather amusing anecdote;
Q: Mr. Romney, did you see the bride, doesn't she look beautiful and isn't it a great day for a wedding?

A: Well, I noticed that her lipstick was a little crooked and one of her flowers doesn't look all that fresh. It's hard to pull off a big wedding, so we'll just have to see how it turns out. I am not sure her parents are all that thrilled about the guy she's marrying either.

I must say though the majority of the posters seem to agree it was rather out of line and are engaging in furious Mitt bashing :rolleyes:

Reply 37

tsnake23

1

Original post by MagicNMedicine

Why has Cameron felt the need to get defensive about it?

The private security firm not having enough people is a major problem.

The whole argument "well we're hosting it in one of the biggest cities in the world so there's bound to be problems" doesn't wash. If you can't deliver it don't bid for it. I bet when the UK was bidding for these games they were reassuring the international Olympic Committee about how our infrastructure is second to none and we could deal with the challenges that hosting in a major city provides.

The Chinese had enough security for the games in Beijing so we should have enough security for the games in London. Unfortunately we gave the contract to a private firm - at a very big price - that wasn't up to the job.

I don't think Romney has said anything wrong here however the fact that everybody has immediately reacted by jumping on him doesn't bode well for him because it suggests that he is seen as a non entity with no right to voice his opinion. Clinton or Obama would have dealt with the question better.

The security issue isn't a big problem at all - the military is more than capable of filling in the large gaps left by G4S. The fact that the organisers were able to call on their backup plan at such short notice is a testimony to how well the Olympics has been organised. It also wasn't the organisers fault that they chose G4S - they are the largest private security company in the world and the world's 3rd largest private sector employer. They should have been more than capable of supplying the required number of security personnel.

The hysteria over infrastructure is also completely ridiculous. The average number of extra journeys on the tube will only be about 25% more than usual during the Olympics. There will be bottlenecks but we will easily be able to cope. I live near Wimbledon and when the championships are on we cope reasonably well even when 100,000's of people descend on tiny Southfields tube station each day with only the District line serving it. Stratford has MUCH better and regular transport links and there will be a lot more organisation to ensure the station doesn't get dangerously overcrowded.

At least the organisers aren't jailing protesters or forcing >1million people out of their homes like in Beijing 2008. And at least we completed the stadiums months before the Olympics started as opposed to days in the case of the Athens 2004 Olympics.

Reply 38

Kolya

17

But he's right, isn't he? My political views are about as different from Romney's as is possible, but the problems in the run-up to the Olympics are concerning. It might not be tactful for him to say it, but there's no reason to dig into him so much just because he's an American saying it.