Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Finally, a thread where nobody will vote for Cleveland!
Typical Pittsburgh native just trashing Cleveland for the sake of laughs since it's an easy target on this site. Or, you just wanna big up Pittsburgh and make yourself feel better.
There is the Coastal West and the Rocky Mountain West. They are two very different regions.
Agreed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwguy2
I am in no position to change the parameters of this poll.
But if I could, I would break it down like this:
Pacific Northwest: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Alaska
Pacific Southwest: California, Arizona, New Mexico, Hawaii
Mountain: Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado
Great Plains: North and South Dakota, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma
West Texas: no definition required
Gulf Coast: East Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida Panhandle
Southeast: Georgia, Florida (outside the panhandle), North and South Carolina, Arkansas and Tennessee
Midwest: Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky
Appalachia: West Virginia, Western North Carolina, Western Maryland
Mid-Atlantic: Virginia, DC, Maryland
Northeast: Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut
New England: Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, (and Maine as an outlier)
I can't place Missouri in any region as it shares too many characteristics of surrounding regions.
So my regionally dominant cities from these are:
Pacific Northwest: Seattle
Pacifc Southwest: Los Angeles
Mountain: Denver
Great Plains: Kansas City
West Texas: San Antonio, but not sure
Gulf Coast: Houston
Southeast: Atlanta
Midwest: Chicago
Appalachia: (???)
Mid-Atlantic: Washington DC
Northeast: New York City
New England: Boston
I'm too tired to refute all of these with you, but. . . I think I'd divide the country into about 6 or 8 regions instead of your 12.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwguy2
Fair enough, but I don't think of New Mexico as a Rocky Mountain State, though there may be an argument there. It is one of those states, like Missouri, that can't exactly be classified as part of any region, IMO.
I agree some other categories could have been added, but it is subjective in where to draw the line. The West Coast / Mountain West distinction is pretty important. But it is also possible to add New England, the Southwest, etc as their own regions. As someone pointed out Virginia and Texas are both technically “southern” but seem worlds apart. Anyway...
I voted Chicago. There are other great cities in the region no doubt, but it easily takes the cake in influence, size, tourism, economy. NYC is a fair vote, but having to compete with the major metros of the BosWash sets it back a bit. D.C. has its own distinct position dominating government. I think that LA having to compete with the Bay Area sets it back too far. Miami and Atlanta are too close for any southern city to come out on top. I guess Houston is really in that southern mix too. It seems odd to group those three as they seem so distinct despite all falling under “southern.” Denver and Phoenix are really in the same region - the Mountain West - and are too close in scope.
I agree some other categories could have been added, but it is subjective in where to draw the line. The West Coast / Mountain West distinction is pretty important. But it is also possible to add New England, the Southwest, etc as their own regions. As someone pointed out Virginia and Texas are both technically “southern” but seem worlds apart. Anyway...
I voted Chicago. There are other great cities in the region no doubt, but it easily takes the cake in influence, size, tourism, economy. NYC is a fair vote, but having to compete with the major metros of the BosWash sets it back a bit. D.C. has its own distinct position dominating government. I think that LA having to compete with the Bay Area sets it back too far. Miami and Atlanta are too close for any southern city to come out on top. I guess Houston is really in that southern mix too. It seems odd to group those three as they seem so distinct despite all falling under “southern.” Denver and Phoenix are really in the same region - the Mountain West - and are too close in scope.
How so? Miami's geographical influence doesn't extend beyond Florida from a domestic point of view and it's closer to Nassau and Havana than New Orleans and Charlotte. Atlanta is well inland and at the crossroads of three major interstates that traverse the Southeast which gives it a wider sphere of influence.
I think Atlanta has MUCH more influence on the Southeast than Miami does. Miami is its own region if anything.
Yea true most people when talking about the south exclude Miami because of it's Latin influence. In terms of hip-hop Miami does have a more prominent role in the southeast because it was the birthplace of southern hip-hop, but outside of hip-hop Miami is seen as more of a Latin city with a Northeastern influence.
Yea true most people when talking about the south exclude Miami because of it's Latin influence. In terms of hip-hop Miami does have a more prominent role in the southeast because it was the birthplace of southern hip-hop, but outside of hip-hop Miami is seen as more of a Latin city with a Northeastern influence.
Miami's regional influence domestically is pretty small, and doesn't even extend to all of Florida. But it is the de facto Capital of the Caribbean, and Americas front office for pretty much all of Latin America. It has huge ties to the NY area as well, and plays a very unique role.
Yea true most people when talking about the south exclude Miami because of it's Latin influence. In terms of hip-hop Miami does have a more prominent role in the southeast because it was the birthplace of southern hip-hop, but outside of hip-hop Miami is seen as more of a Latin city with a Northeastern influence.
It was?
Quote:
Gulf Coast: East Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida Panhandle
I think for Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, it's best to keep it at the Southern parts of those states.
There's no city in the South that's regionally dominant due to size of the region. You'll have to split it 3 ways: Southwest l, MiSouth, & Southeast. Imo: Houston for Southwest, Memphis for Midsouth, & Atlanta for Southeast.
How so? Miami's geographical influence doesn't extend beyond Florida from a domestic point of view and it's closer to Nassau and Havana than New Orleans and Charlotte. Atlanta is well inland and at the crossroads of three major interstates that traverse the Southeast which gives it a wider sphere of influence.
My point was rather that folks in Florida, particularly southern Florida, would not consider their region's big city to be Miami. Likewise for someone in Texas, Oklahoma, or Louisiana. They would respond Houston. Their region is still the South, even if Miami is culturally distinct. The South has too many close to peer cities to have one clearly outshine. Atlanta dominates AL, GA, TN, SC, and NC. That is not the majority of the South.
If you asked Midwesterner what the Midwest's dominant city is, almost anyone would respond Chicago.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
