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.
I could go as far as saying the great lakes are the buffer between the northeast and Midwest
IMO if you need a dividing line between the north east and the Midwest it's somewhere between buffalo and Cleveland. What's interesting is that would put buffalo in the northeast but buffalo has more in common with Cleveland than it does cities in its own state like Albany or NYC.
I think there's a lot of overlap in new England, the north east, mid Atlantic and Midwest.
And good luck getting people to agree on what the south is lol
I think what you are getting at is that area is where the boundary between the Northeast and the Midwest is the narrowest. Basically, just the border between two states, Ohio and Pennsylvania. As go both westward and eastward from there, both the Midwest and Northeast broaden out and get wider north and south.
But that is not because of the Great Lakes (Lake Erie actually). The Great Lakes are not really a buffer between the Midwest and Northeast, instead they actually connect the Midwest and Northeast.
What creates a buffer between the Northeast and Midwest is the province of Ontario and the fact that Ontario actually dips far south. Ontario actually borders Ohio and Pennsylvania, which means that Ontario is just one state away from bordering Upper South states like Kentucky and West Virginia!
Midwest is slower paced
Midwest is more Scandinavian by heritage (especially Minnesota/Iowa)
Midwest is newer, and has less "old money"
Midwest is more spread out and cities are set up with grid-patterned streets, not curves and circles
Midwest is flatter, topographically
Midwest is more rural, on average
Midwest is more affordable
Midwest is generally a bit colder, and drier
Midwesterners talk differently
Midwesterners drink more beer
Midwest is slower paced
Midwest is more Scandinavian by heritage (especially Minnesota/Iowa)
Midwest is newer, and has less "old money"
Midwest is more spread out and cities are set up with grid-patterned streets, not curves and circles
Midwest is flatter, topographically
Midwest is more rural, on average
Midwest is more affordable
Midwest is generally a bit colder, and drier
Midwesterners talk differently
Midwesterners drink more beer
Is Buffalo and Pittsburgh faster paced than Chicago and Minneapolis? The northeast is more than the coastal areas.
I'd say these days the Midwest is more closely connected to the South than the Northeast, politically and culturally. These two regions are heavily religious and rural.
The real divide in this country is between East and West though. The Midwest, Northeast, and Southern states are more traditional and the people more realistic, "stick with what works" mindset, and they are more connected as one cohesive region. The Western states are more liberal and the people more idealistic, "lets try something new" mindset. People who were considered outsiders or "weird" always headed West.
Yes, and millions of Southerners migrated to the Midwest in search of factory jobs in the 20 century, heavily influencing the culture of much of it.
Ohio has many similarities with Pennsylvania and Upstate NY. The interior northeast isn't that different from the midwest.
Ohio is extremely varied as well. The southeastern part is rugged Appalachian region...a cultural extension of West Virginia and Kentucky. The northern part is heavily influenced by the Great Lakes and northeastern cultures. There was a good deal if Appalachian immigration into this area as well to industrial centers such as Cleveland and Akron. The SW was largely settled by immigrants from the northeastern US and Germany, with a large number of Southerners, largely African-Americans and Appalachians, coming north to work in the regions industrial cities (chiefly, but not exclusively, Cincinnati and Dayton, with Middletown, Hamilton, and Springfield forming a second tier of industrial cities in this region, with numerous smaller ones) in the 20th century. Cincinnati also had a large Southern influence due to its position on the Ohio River and river trade and rail lines extending into the South (it actually had a city owned railroad line that extended well into the South).
Go into the buffalo forum, most people can't even agree on the best definition for which region buffalo falls into
Buffalo and Rochester feel to me like Great Lake cities first and foremost. They are in a Northeastern state, but the sparsely populated, rugged interior act as a barrier to the rest of the urban northeast. The fit far better with the northern industrial cities of northern Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, even Chicago than the colonial era coastal plain/piedmont cities of the Mid-Atlantic or new England.
Pittsburgh always a weird one. It doesn't really have a natural region like the great lakes cities. Is it an Appalachian plateau city? An Ohio River Valley city? An interior extension of the Great Lakes industrial corridor? Cincinnati is the only major city that is somewhat like it. Perhaps if Louisville was more northern, St. Louis more eastern and Indianapolis and Columbus more industrial and rugged all those cities would form a river city counterpart to the great lakes?
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.
