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.
Just search up any poll on this site pitting Sacramento against other cities. Sacramento comes surprisingly close. Whenever you say that Sacramento doesn't have the amenities, economy, etc. of even similarly-sized cities, throngs of Sacramento defenders will drown you out. The number one selling point for Sacramento is that it's only 1.5 hours to SF and 2 hours from skiing in Lake Tahoe (without traffic). The geographic proximity to attractions should be a consideration for a city, but if it's Sacramento's main selling point, that's a problem. That's saying there simply isn't much to offer within the city.
Here's a quote from the OKC vs. Sacramento thread:
Hmm, Sacramento's now better than Portland, San Diego, and Phoenix just for being relatively close to SF and Lake Tahoe?
This below quote is coming from a longtime resident of Sacramento:
Ah, finally some honesty. Pistola916 later mentioned he or she preferred Sac to OKC, which I 100% understand. But at least he/she was honest enough to say it was mostly because of the weather and that as major cities both have as much to offer as the other, and OKC's downtown was more vibrant.
OK, so I was right the first time: you're basing this on nothing more than C-D polls and threads. I thought you had something more substantial since you used to live in the area. I'm nowhere near convinced that Sacramento is this pretentious prima donna you're making it out to be.
This below quote is coming from a longtime resident of Sacramento:
Ah, finally some honesty. Pistola916 later mentioned he or she preferred Sac to OKC, which I 100% understand. But at least he/she was honest enough to say it was mostly because of the weather and that as major cities both have as much to offer as the other, and OKC's downtown was more vibrant.
Let me clear things up: metro population aside, I do think Sac and OKC's downtown/central city core are quite similar. I don't have one superior above the other. My preference for Sac is largely because of its ethnic diversity, weather and political spectrum - I lean more left than anything. But that's a matter of personal preference. I think both cities downtown are subpar and are doing their best to improve it. I can only speak for Sac, but they are doing some wonderful things to bolster its downtown (convention center expansion, several midrise apartments being built and soon MLS stadium)
I would stop short from calling Sac pretentious. That's far from the truth. There's nothing wrong in a city trying to lure business and improve its economy by way of economic development. Furthermore, I find our residents to be humble, friendly and down-to-earth people.
Let me clear things up: metro population aside, I do think Sac and OKC's downtown/central city core are quite similar. I don't have one superior above the other. My preference for Sac is largely because of its ethnic diversity, weather and political spectrum - I lean more left than anything. But that's a matter of personal preference. I think both cities downtown are subpar and are doing their best to improve it. I can only speak for Sac, but they are doing some wonderful things to bolster its downtown (convention center expansion, several midrise apartments being built and soon MLS stadium)
I would stop short from calling Sac pretentious. That's far from the truth. There's nothing wrong in a city trying to lure business and improve its economy by way of economic development. Furthermore, I find our residents to be humble, friendly and down-to-earth people.
I respect your opinion 100%. Like you said, OKC and Sacramento are in the same league. And I 100% get why you would choose Sacramento for its diversity, weather, and political spectrum. Those are subjective, personal preferences.
I think Sacramento is about to enter an enormous building boom that will see it surpass OKC in terms of amenities in the next decade. But for most of the last decade, I'd say OKC was solidly leading Sacramento. OKC was improving its downtown/urban core by leaps and bounds while Sacramento, hit hard by the recession, had Downtown construction almost completely stalled.
I do find Sacramento people to be friendlier than people in the Bay Area or in Southern California, no doubt about that. I am not against the Sacramento people in real life, but you did say that you thought that people "pretended" that Sacramento was on par with Austin and Portland even though it's not; didn't you? In that respect I find Sacramento pretentious. Oh well, maybe your opinion changed since you wrote that post four years ago.
Nobody is pretending that Sacramento is exactly in the same league as Austin and Portland, we know we don't have the popularity, we don't have the "young, hip, and privileged white factor" of Austin or the ultra liberal, dare I say pretense of Portlandia. But, there are strong similarities, if you really like Austin and Portland you are going to find many similarities in Sacramento than a lot of other places of similar size.
Sacramento is in the same economic league as Cincinnati, Kansas City, San Antonio, Austin, Orlando, (Baltimore), Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Salt Lake City.
Sacramento is a West Coast city with large mountains, and ocean beaches near by for an easy day-trip, hence the likeness to Portland as opposed to Midwest cities.
Having large mountains, Tahoe and the Coast nearby is a great feature, but it is not the primary reason why we love Sacramento.
I personally, love Sacramento rivers more now than the mountains and coast, lately, on a recreationally level for convenience. Again, two similarities with Austin and Portland.
And to set the recored, straight I tend to compare Sacramento with Austin and Portland on weather more than anything. Dare I say, a Sacramento summer is way way more enjoyable than an Austin summer, and a Sacramento winter is a lot more tolerable than a Portland winter. Is that being pretentious.
People often say, if Sacramento was the primary city in California, in other words, if LA, SF, and San Diego were in different states; Then Sacramento would be known much more for it attributes than its negatives. That's not being pretentious.
I would stop short from calling Sac pretentious. That's far from the truth. There's nothing wrong in a city trying to lure business and improve its economy by way of economic development.
Furthermore, I find our residents to be humble, friendly and down-to-earth people.
I've been describing Sacramento as such, humble, friendly and down-to-earth for a long long time. And for someone to come along and describe Sacrameno as pretentious is so far from the truth.
Pretentious Cities
San Diego
Tampa Bay
San Francisco
Vancouver
Denver
Austin
Mississauga
Montreal
Unpretentious Cities Charleston
Annapolis
New Orleans
Boston
Winnipeg
San Antonio
Charlottetown (Can)
Quebec City
Charleston? isn't Charleston known for exuding Southern charm and wealth.
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.
isn't Charleston known for exuding Southern charm and wealth.
