Both suck.
I did time in bitchlanta from 1992-1996 (was temporarily released during the Olympics and got the hell out of dodge for about 3 months spanning the games themselves and equal time on either side--but was there for the vast majority of the time leading up to the Summer Games in '96).
I do not know what everyone's working definition of 'qualified' is, but if it has anything to do with having the requisite venues, hotels, and infrastructure in place prior to receiving apporval to host a Summer Olympics--the current arguement(s) against Boston being able to host, then that nubbins town of bitchlanta was not qualified when they were awarded the games, several years prior to 1996.
They became marginally-so through a massive construction drive for most of the venues--the Olympic stadium, the swimming center, the athlete's village, the equestrian park, the rowing pool, etc. did not exist when the the bid was awarded (I am sure there are several others that likewise were created for the games, but I am just going off of memory).
When they received the bid, there was a concurrent uptick in the construction of hotels and other such tourist/visitor establishments. The joint was already somewhat of a convention destination, so there was a reasonable amount of this crap already in place.
The news of the Olympics coming to town in 4-5 years or so proved very energizing and uniting and a fairly impressive amount of work towards this was accomplished. THAT would probably be why Boston will likely never host an Olympics because of the dipshits that are presently (and have been and probably will be) in positions of power and authority could not effectively orchestrate the preparation.
All that said, my fingers will be crossed for Chicago.
