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 lived for a year and a half in Texas and did not like it. I live in Missouri now, and some parts of MO can be considered Southern, but KC area is more "midwestern". My girlfriend and I love the midwest (she is from the midwest), and our top choice is Wisconsin (what a beautiful state). I would say my favorite southern "area" is Cincinnati. My grandfather lives there. I have realized in my travels that I am a born and bred Northerner (I a native of the Empire State). Nothing wrong with that. Wisconsin, you are my paradise!
I lived for a year and a half in Texas and did not like it. I live in Missouri now, and some parts of MO can be considered Southern, but KC area is more "midwestern". My girlfriend and I love the midwest (she is from the midwest), and our top choice is Wisconsin (what a beautiful state). I would say my favorite southern "area" is Cincinnati. My grandfather lives there. I have realized in my travels that I am a born and bred Northerner (I a native of the Empire State). Nothing wrong with that. Wisconsin, you are my paradise!
Doesn't really contradict me. I think Missouri is an overall Midwestern state. It at least fits that description better than a Southern one. How Missouri and Cincinnati can be grouped in with places like Louisville and Kentucky i don't know. KC and St. Louis are definitely Midwestern. Cincinnati is definitely Midwestern, aside from its political attitudes I wouldn't notice any difference between it and Columbus. Only parts of Missouri I think meet the definition of southern are those around Springfield, Joplin, and basically heading due east from there. Most of Missouri does not fit the profile of Southern, at least not in my book. I personally think people take the few Southern characteristics Missouri has and try to blow them up to make them look like they overpower the Midwestern ones, when they do not come even close to that. We are far more like Iowa I would say as a whole state than Arkansas or Kentucky. Some parts of illinois and indiana can be considered southern, but do I seem them being grouped in with the South? If a state is more Midwestern than it is Southern, it's not part of the South! That is exactly the case with Missouri. Until somebody can give me overwhelming evidence that modern Missouri is a lot more like Kentucky and Arkansas in many more ways than it is like any other Midwestern state, or even just as like Arkansas and Kentucky as it is like the Midwest, I think it would be safe to include Missouri in the with the Midwest. It just doesn't make sense to exclude us from the Midwest and group us in with the South....to do that is to exclude over half of Illinois as well and if Missouri can't be considered Midwestern, neither I think can a huge portion of Indiana so that should be excluded to. Missouri and all the other lower Midwestern states have Southern components to them, but those shouldn't be used to argue that the states as a whole don't belong in the Midwest. i don't understand the logic of that. The U.S. Census Bureau considers Missouri Midwest, practically every modern source out there does. Indiana is in many ways more Southern than Missouri is...sweet tea is served in over half of that state, unusual for a Midwest state, yet I don't see them being included in the South. Cincinnati didn't seem Southern at all when I visited there. Many Southern baptists reside there too. In Cincinnati, I heard nothing but midwestern dialect, the city is heavily industrial and doesn't seem to have that laid-back of a lifestyle to me, the population is noticeably catholic, architecture is very similar to that of Columbus, it gained in black population during the Migration...no Southern city has these characteristics. Also, it's weather is not exactly what I'd call Southern either. Not upper Midwestern, but its winters, like St. Louis and Kansas City's, are a lot closer to being like Indianapolis and Columbus than to say, Nashville. No comparison. Here is also a pretty convincing thing that I found out. The University of North Carolina conducted a nationwide survey for people who considered their state to be the South. The result was something like 69 percent for Oklahoma, between 70 and 80 percent for Kentucky, 15% for the D.C. area, and 23% for Missouri. 77% voted Missouri was part of the Midwest. 23% I think is a pretty insignificant number. If only 23% of Missouri's residents consider it Southern, and 77% consider it Midwestern, I think that is more than good enough reason to group it in with the Midwest, and if not all of it, most of it. Less than 20% of Delaware and Maryland consider themselves Southern too according to the survey, and I don't consider these Southern either.
I would say Joplin and Branson and some other areas of the Ozarks seem to blend into Arkansas in terms of culture, and that is southern-ish. I have been to Cape Girardeau and that seemed kind of southern to me too.
I've visited both Charleston and Richmond. I've even visited the Virginia state capitol building. It was the first place I ever saw southern magnolia trees and they were huge.
Both seemed to be great cities, however I've seen stats showing Richmond averages 11" of snow annually and that scares me.
Thats an average. We hardly ever have that much.
I grew up in northern virginia and even there we never once had a white Christmas.
I disagree about Missouri and Kentucky being grouped "Together" in a region. THese states are in no way similar to each other. I think the residents really should be the final decider about a state's identity. I would say that the northern half of Missouri qualifies as being 100% Midwestern, this includes all of St. Louis, Kansas City, Jefferson City, and Columbia. I'd also say the Southern half of Kentucky qualifies as being 100% Southern. Missouri as a whole is a Midwestern state, believe me, as Kentucky is a Southern one. But I guess I'm just one person. The surveys I put out were a pretty good sampling of people from all over those states, around 200 from each state.
Having lived in KY for 18 years, I certainly believe KY is a southern state. Sure, it isn't the Deep South and it was a divided state during the Civil War. However, I am speaking more along the lines of traditions, beliefs and mentalities, all of which I believe are typical of the South.
The only exception I will make note of is the northern KY part of the state where Cinci sprawls into KY. People there seem more midwestern than southern but it is a small portion of the total state population.
Having lived in KY for 18 years, I certainly believe KY is a southern state. Sure, it isn't the Deep South and it was a divided state during the Civil War. However, I am speaking more along the lines of traditions, beliefs and mentalities, all of which I believe are typical of the South.
The only exception I will make note of is the northern KY part of the state where Cinci sprawls into KY. People there seem more midwestern than southern but it is a small portion of the total state population.
Agreed. Other than the Cincy metro parts of Kentucky, there is no question Kentucky is Dixie. Kentucky is not the Deep South, in fact Kentucky to me seems quite typical of a state from the Upper South, much like Virginia and North Carolina.
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.
hehehe
