Romney's Running for the 2012 Olympics was MASTERFUL!!!

GHook93

Aristotle
Apr 22, 2007
20,150
3,524
290
Chicago
It's not a secret that nearly all Olympics host cities lose money are are in debt for years! See Madrid and the Rio for clear examples. Salt Lake City ("SLC") was headed in that direction projected to lose $379 mil and that was a very liberal estimate. They tapped Romney at the last minute. There goal for him was make the losses as little as possible! LOL sounds just like a true government plan. However, Romney wasn't satisfied with such low expectations. He wanted to buck the trend of host cities losing money and that is exactly what he did. In the end he look the SLC Olympics from the red to the black to the tune of $100 mil in profit!!! Not too shabby!!!


In Games, a showcase for future races - The Boston Globe

"Before Romney came on, the event was running $379 million short of its revenue benchmarks. Plans were being made to scale back the Games to compensate for the fiscal crisis, and there were fears the Games might be moved away entirely. The Games had also been damaged by allegations of bribery involving top officials, including prior Salt Lake Olympic Committee president and CEO Frank Joklik. Joklik and committee vice president Dave Johnson were forced to resign.

Romney ran the planning for the Games like a business. He revamped the organization's leadership and policies, reduced budgets, and boosted fundraising, alleviated the concerns of corporate sponsors and recruited many new ones. Overall, he oversaw a $1.32 billion budget, 700 employees, and 26,000 volunteers.

Despite the initial fiscal shortfall, the Games ended up clearing a profit of $100 million."
 
Why the dems focus on his signature on a form instead of his saving the Olympics says a lot. They don't understand competence. Why was Mitt picked to lead the Olympics effort and not someone else? Why not Vandenheuvel, or Chris Matthers, or Ed Schultz, or Rachael Maddow, or any of the democrat fanatics?
 
It's not a secret that nearly all Olympics host cities lose money are are in debt for years! See Madrid and the Rio for clear examples. Salt Lake City ("SLC") was headed in that direction projected to lose $379 mil and that was a very liberal estimate. They tapped Romney at the last minute. There goal for him was make the losses as little as possible! LOL sounds just like a true government plan. However, Romney wasn't satisfied with such low expectations. He wanted to buck the trend of host cities losing money and that is exactly what he did. In the end he look the SLC Olympics from the red to the black to the tune of $100 mil in profit!!! Not too shabby!!!


In Games, a showcase for future races - The Boston Globe

"Before Romney came on, the event was running $379 million short of its revenue benchmarks. Plans were being made to scale back the Games to compensate for the fiscal crisis, and there were fears the Games might be moved away entirely. The Games had also been damaged by allegations of bribery involving top officials, including prior Salt Lake Olympic Committee president and CEO Frank Joklik. Joklik and committee vice president Dave Johnson were forced to resign.

Romney ran the planning for the Games like a business. He revamped the organization's leadership and policies, reduced budgets, and boosted fundraising, alleviated the concerns of corporate sponsors and recruited many new ones. Overall, he oversaw a $1.32 billion budget, 700 employees, and 26,000 volunteers.

Despite the initial fiscal shortfall, the Games ended up clearing a profit of $100 million."
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9S2daN0Kn8]Mitt Romney bragging about getting government money in 2002 - YouTube[/ame]
 
Why the dems focus on his signature on a form instead of his saving the Olympics says a lot. They don't understand competence. Why was Mitt picked to lead the Olympics effort and not someone else? Why not Vandenheuvel, or Chris Matthers, or Ed Schultz, or Rachael Maddow, or any of the democrat fanatics?

Because his background shown his competence to do so...We need someone to run this country that has just that.

I think the left cares about its agenda far more than having a competent leader in office. One of sickness over sound economics.
 
Last edited:
Seriously? You use the word masterful? Next you're going to say you're a non-partisan independent :lol:
 
And yet, I remember so many cheering Chicago, ergo, the United States, NOT getting the 2016 Olympics.

Many of us were quite happy to see South America host the Summer games for a change. And we weren't very impressed with Obama spending tax payer money in an effort to get them so his buddies could make money. Corruption isnt really something to be happy about.

Of course, none of this really changes the fact that Romney did a phenominal job with the SLC and provided an Olympic games that shows the United States in an excellent light.

Nor does it change the fact that with the summer games starting shortly, people are going to be reminded about how well a job Romney did do.
 
They should have had Obama run the Olympics, he would have made sure big successful evil countries like the U.S. were given handicaps, so small third world countries had just as much chance at losing.
And of course all participants would receive gold medals since we can't take a chance at hurting their self-esteem.
 
It's not a secret that nearly all Olympics host cities lose money are are in debt for years! See Madrid and the Rio for clear examples. Salt Lake City ("SLC") was headed in that direction projected to lose $379 mil and that was a very liberal estimate. They tapped Romney at the last minute. There goal for him was make the losses as little as possible! LOL sounds just like a true government plan. However, Romney wasn't satisfied with such low expectations. He wanted to buck the trend of host cities losing money and that is exactly what he did. In the end he look the SLC Olympics from the red to the black to the tune of $100 mil in profit!!! Not too shabby!!!


In Games, a showcase for future races - The Boston Globe

"Before Romney came on, the event was running $379 million short of its revenue benchmarks. Plans were being made to scale back the Games to compensate for the fiscal crisis, and there were fears the Games might be moved away entirely. The Games had also been damaged by allegations of bribery involving top officials, including prior Salt Lake Olympic Committee president and CEO Frank Joklik. Joklik and committee vice president Dave Johnson were forced to resign.

Romney ran the planning for the Games like a business. He revamped the organization's leadership and policies, reduced budgets, and boosted fundraising, alleviated the concerns of corporate sponsors and recruited many new ones. Overall, he oversaw a $1.32 billion budget, 700 employees, and 26,000 volunteers.

Despite the initial fiscal shortfall, the Games ended up clearing a profit of $100 million."

The LA Games in 84 made 200 million. The Atlanta Olympics were profitable.
 
It's not a secret that nearly all Olympics host cities lose money are are in debt for years! See Madrid and the Rio for clear examples. Salt Lake City ("SLC") was headed in that direction projected to lose $379 mil and that was a very liberal estimate. They tapped Romney at the last minute. There goal for him was make the losses as little as possible! LOL sounds just like a true government plan. However, Romney wasn't satisfied with such low expectations. He wanted to buck the trend of host cities losing money and that is exactly what he did. In the end he look the SLC Olympics from the red to the black to the tune of $100 mil in profit!!! Not too shabby!!!


In Games, a showcase for future races - The Boston Globe

"Before Romney came on, the event was running $379 million short of its revenue benchmarks. Plans were being made to scale back the Games to compensate for the fiscal crisis, and there were fears the Games might be moved away entirely. The Games had also been damaged by allegations of bribery involving top officials, including prior Salt Lake Olympic Committee president and CEO Frank Joklik. Joklik and committee vice president Dave Johnson were forced to resign.

Romney ran the planning for the Games like a business. He revamped the organization's leadership and policies, reduced budgets, and boosted fundraising, alleviated the concerns of corporate sponsors and recruited many new ones. Overall, he oversaw a $1.32 billion budget, 700 employees, and 26,000 volunteers.

Despite the initial fiscal shortfall, the Games ended up clearing a profit of $100 million."

The LA Games in 84 made 200 million. The Atlanta Olympics were profitable.

Yep....but some hated the idea of another U.S. Summer Olympics, it appears.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top