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.
That's wrong. California, as with most of the West, was settled by mostly midwesterners. Coastal California, got some Northeasterners as well. If Californians had mostly southern roots their accent would reflect that. In 1900, 4-5% of Californians were born in the South; it never reached more than 10%. Midwest + Northeast was several times higher:
What this poll shows me is that either there are a lot of people in denial about the role the South played or are just uneducated about how much influence the South really has.
What this poll shows me is that either there are a lot of people in denial about the role the South played or are just uneducated about how much influence the South really has.
I guess we could do this for every region, but I kind of hope we don't. People are easily offended if others don't drink their kool aid, and many of us are territorial..."my region is best, because......"
NYTimes link shows every decade. % born in Oklahoma and Texas went from 2% to 6% from 1930 to 1940. Lower Central Valley is a small part of California population-wise. The southern roots of the Central Valley are reflected in voting patterns today:
lower Central Valley averages about 20% Democrat among white voters; rural west is more typically 30-40% with some parts higher. Methodology has a few problematic assumptions, but the general pattern is likely correct.
What this poll shows me is that either there are a lot of people in denial about the role the South played or are just uneducated about how much influence the South really has.
I'm aware the south has had a large influence on music and literature, but in other general attitudes, the south is more of a subculture that's distinct from the rest of the country, though not as much now than 50 years ago
That's wrong. California, as with most of the West, was settled by mostly midwesterners. Coastal California, got some Northeasterners as well. If Californians had mostly southern roots their accent would reflect that. In 1900, 4-5% of Californians were born in the South; it never reached more than 10%. Midwest + Northeast was several times higher:
I dont see how that graph reflects that, the south has always had much more emigration into California than the northeast, and that graph is only data from 1900. Texas and the South judging from that graph seems to always represent a large part of migration into California, Texas was the largest source of state in- migration into California up even in 1970, that graph also puts Missouri in the midwest so I think that skews the numbers.
The largest states for emigration into California from that poll seems have been Texas,Oklahoma,Illinois,Missouri and New york
Texas seems to be the state by far attracting the most emigrants from Californians leaving over the last decade, in 2004 to 2013, 600,000 people have moved from California to Texas and judging from alot of population numbers that emigration is continuing at the same high levels
I've never understood why the standard of living and education, seems to differ so much from regions. I don't know about the South defining the culture of he USA. I've always wondered why the South, isn't it's own country. I'm also going to add this. You would be hard pressed to find many people, that live in a state outside of the southeast,. Referring to themselves as a Northerner.
Southerners call the rest of the Nation the North, but I can say New England is certainly a region people still associate with.
I dont see how that graph reflects that, the south has always had much more emigration into California than the northeast, and that graph is only data from 1900. Texas and the South judging from that graph seems to always represent a large part of migration into California, Texas was the largest source of state in- migration into California up even in 1970, that graph also puts Missouri in the midwest so I think that skews the numbers.
The largest states for emigration into California from that poll seems have been Texas,Oklahoma,Illinois,Missouri and New york
The South looks much smaller than the Northeast and Midwest combined from the graph, I'm puzzled how you're reading it differently. While the oldest data is from 1900, the data is where Californians were born; so someon who was born in 1870 and moved to California would be counted. For example, 1920 6% of Californians were born in the South, 30% in the North.
I guess we could do this for every region, but I kind of hope we don't. People are easily offended if others don't drink their kool aid, and many of us are territorial..."my region is best, because......"
It's not about which region is better than the other though, even though some are trying to make it that way. Truth of the matter is the American education system fails us, especially when it pertains to History. I mean it's pretty obvious that the South is the most cultural region in the US, but most Americans don't know this because there's a misconception that the South is nothing but NASCAR and Rednecks, when in actuality it's the region with the most richest cultures in the US. Courage the Cowardly Dog did an episode on Slavery, Maroon Communities, and Negro Spirituals.
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.
