Why Chicago won't get the Olympics...

If you have been listening to or reading the news or watching it over the last week you would be under the impression that the 2016 Olympics are going to Chicago hands down. You would be wrong. First of all what seems to be its strongest competitor, Rio de Janeiro just had to cancel the World Cup of swimming not due to violence (Chicago's #1 problem at the moment, more on that in a minute) but lack of MONEY. You know money, the thing that typically every city needs in order to operate and host something as big as the Olympics. Another problem I have with the Rio bid is that they're hosting the 2014 World Cup (soccer) and to turn around and host the Olympics 2 years after that would be hard, not to mention despite all the press Chicago has been getting about gang violence its a LOT worse in Rio and Brazil over all (because the games would be hosted all throughout the country, not just in Rio).
Another ereason I don't think Chicago won't get the bid is because of 2 major things, major conflict of interest for Obama and Daley (look it up or watch a replay of Glenn Beck from last night) and the lackluster support for the games. Just a few months ago support was 2-1 for the games among Chicago citizens. Now 47% approve and 45% disapprove. Not to mention the city (like most of the country) is virtually broke. I have to say even personally for me this time last week I was 100% for the games in Chi-town but I have done a complete about face in the last 48 hours due to findings that Obama's cronies would benefit a lot and that international tourist would get beat to death by the idiot gang members (sidenote, there's another tape that was just released about another beating on Drudge, to lazy to link to it).
Finally I don't want the 2016 Olympics in Chicago for a selfish reason, there is a very good chance if they don't get awarded it tomorrow (almost exactly 24 hours from now) that my own Twin Cities could get a bid for the 2020 games. We showed the world we could pull off the RNC last fall (which I am proud to say I was down there all 4 days, at Xcel, as a volunteer) and we have the infrastructure even now that could legitimately host the games.
Finally the two other cities that almost everyone else has written off, Tokyo and Madrid, have better claims but also problems. Japan hosted the 1998 winter games (sidenote: 2010 winter games are in Vancouver, if anyone cares) in Nagano and it seemed to go off without a hitch but the problem with awarding them the 2016 summer olympics is the proximity to Bejing who just hosted the 2008 summer games. Madrid has a case because its sister city (Barcelona) hosted the 1992 games that were very successful but the problem is that London gets the 2012 games and I'm not sure if consecutive summer olympics have ever been hosted on the same continent before, ever. So basically you can make a case for and against all of the finalist cities hosting the 2016 Olympics as I have to a certain extent. Everyone thinks it will be Chicago because we haven't had the summer olympics since Atlanta in 1996 (but we did have the 2002 winter games in Salt Lake City). So my pick for the 2016 games? Rio de Janeiro and here's why, if the vote was last Friday, Chicago would have had it hands down. They have been their own worst enemy over the last week and citizens are literally revolting in the city (2016 games decorations were burned yesterday by anti-olympic protesters). Mark my words Chicago WILL NOT get the Olypmics awarded to them and if I'm dead wrong I will have a lot of explaining to do, which I will do, if the IOC actually does award them the games tomorrow.