(I'm guessing people will be for the 3 hosts but here are my arguements:
Brazil - All for them hosting, but the BBC did this news report on the areas around certain stadiums and it was terribly hit by poverty, them getting no help whatsoever because Brazil are more focused on the building of stadiums, it was depressing to watch. Also, they're behind already on all stadiums and Sepp Blater made it worse by telling them to hurry up. He's about as popular as he is in England you can guess.
Russia - Really? 1 of the coldest countries in places on earth? Really? The place with 11 time zones? Really? You picked them over the creators of football itself. You picked them over Portugal/Spain, 2 of the best performing footballing teams in the world. All 3 of these have amazingly great stadiums for the world cup! WTF do russia have?! Really?
Quarter - This 1 annoyed me more than any. America: 1 of the biggest sporting nations to date, Amazing stadiums, not the best at football but them hosting the world cup again would improve the image of it over there. Australia: Big gun in sports, they know how to put on a good show like olympics 2000 so they would of do brilliant. Quarter: 1 athletics stadium that can hold 15,000 people in it...1 of the hottest countries around, so excluding african countries everyone will burn alive playing football and you hand them the fucking world cup!?)
I completely went off topic...sorry lol Must suck for Libya fans though, sporting cups bring in quite a bit of money like the olympics and I reckon they would of loved that.