Missouri...Southern or Midwestern? (St. Louis, Columbia: unemployment, summer, Scottish)

[GunnerTHB]

Originally Posted by onegoalstl

Arkansas Dept of conservation is stocking some alligators in north central, NW AR in the ozarks. Imagine being at Bull shoals and seeing a gator.

In the civil war Dunklin county seceeded themselves.

Dunklin County seceeded from Missouri, not the union.

[onegoalstl]

KSHE, If Missouri was an undisputed Confederate state, do you think today it would be called more southern? Would stl been a little more southern?

If not for Lyon's rapid invasion of the state we probably would not be disputing if MO was an offical Confederate state or not. After Camp Jackson, Claiborne Jackson told Jefferson Davis that in 30 days Missouri would be officially seceeded. However that didn't happen because they were then put on the run, then deposed.

Do you think if the lawmakers were able to vote on it before being evicted that things would be different today?

I think Missouri would have been more heavily Democrat than it was and one or both of our senators would have voted against the civil rights act for example.

[imperialmog]

Originally Posted by onegoalstl

KSHE, If Missouri was an undisputed Confederate state, do you think today it would be called more southern? Would stl been a little more southern?

If not for Lyon's rapid invasion of the state we probably would not be disputing if MO was an offical Confederate state or not. After Camp Jackson, Claiborne Jackson told Jefferson Davis that in 30 days Missouri would be officially seceeded. However that didn't happen because they were then put on the run, then deposed.

Do you think if the lawmakers were able to vote on it before being evicted that things would be different today?

I think Missouri would have been more heavily Democrat than it was and one or both of our senators would have voted against the civil rights act for example.

Actually if that happened, it could have made it more possible that the entire outcome of the Civil War would be in doubt. Since that scenario would likely result in Kentucky also seceeding with a lot of the disparities in population and industry becoming more equal. That would be a big possible divergence since it also would in time alter world history.

[kshe95girl]

Originally Posted by onegoalstl

KSHE, If Missouri was an undisputed Confederate state, do you think today it would be called more southern? Would stl been a little more southern?

If not for Lyon's rapid invasion of the state we probably would not be disputing if MO was an offical Confederate state or not. After Camp Jackson, Claiborne Jackson told Jefferson Davis that in 30 days Missouri would be officially seceeded. However that didn't happen because they were then put on the run, then deposed.

Do you think if the lawmakers were able to vote on it before being evicted that things would be different today?

I think Missouri would have been more heavily Democrat than it was and one or both of our senators would have voted against the civil rights act for example.

To be honest, that scenario is Monday morning quarterbacking the Civil War, which in my mind, is a waste of time.
It never happened, is never going to happen, so I dont see the point of worrying about it.
Cant see STL being more southern at all, there were already quite a few German and Irish immigrants there at the time the war broke out....

[onegoalstl]

Originally Posted by kshe95girl

To be honest, that scenario is Monday morning quarterbacking the Civil War, which in my mind, is a waste of time.
It never happened, is never going to happen, so I dont see the point of worrying about it.
Cant see STL being more southern at all, there were already quite a few German and Irish immigrants there at the time the war broke out....

Actually the Irish were not as Pro Union as Germans. Some Stl Irish joined Sterling Price and the State Guard, and the Confederacy.

"Price's Raid" and the battle of Pea Ridge were deciding moments. If the Confederates were able to win in Pea Ridge, the wars outcome could have been totally different if Sterling Price was able to rescue Missouri from the yankee invaders.

Same with Pilot Knob. If Sterling Price didn't waste time there and went to St. Louis instead and drove out the invaders.

to the OP I'm still not sure Kentucky would have seceeded. Kentucky's lawmakers were all pro union, and kentuckian's voted pro union. Only their governer was pro south, but still mostly neutral unlike Clairbone Jackson. Most of Missouri's lawmakers were pro Confederate. Outside of the Stl area most of MO leaned Pro South.

another mistake was the constitutional convention meeting in St. Louis. If it would have met in Jefferson City most historians agree the convention would have voted to seceede due to no influence from St. Louis.

Father John Bannon and the St. Louis Irish Confederate Community.

[kshe95girl]

Originally Posted by onegoalstl

Actually the Irish were not as Pro Union as Germans. Some Stl Irish joined Sterling Price and the State Guard, and the Confederacy.

"Price's Raid" and the battle of Pea Ridge were deciding moments. If the Confederates were able to win in Pea Ridge, the wars outcome could have been totally different if Sterling Price was able to rescue Missouri from the yankee invaders.

Same with Pilot Knob. If Sterling Price didn't waste time there and went to St. Louis instead and drove out the invaders.

to the OP I'm still not sure Kentucky would have seceeded. Kentucky's lawmakers were all pro union, and kentuckian's voted pro union. Only their governer was pro south, but still mostly neutral unlike Clairbone Jackson. Most of Missouri's lawmakers were pro Confederate. Outside of the Stl area most of MO leaned Pro South.

another mistake was the constitutional convention meeting in St. Louis. If it would have met in Jefferson City most historians agree the convention would have voted to seceede due to no influence from St. Louis.

Father John Bannon and the St. Louis Irish Confederate Community.

You failed to see my point about the Irish, they did not make STL more Southern.

[latetotheparty]

Originally Posted by kshe95girl

To be honest, that scenario is Monday morning quarterbacking the Civil War, which in my mind, is a waste of time.
It never happened, is never going to happen, so I dont see the point of worrying about it.
Cant see STL being more southern at all, there were already quite a few German and Irish immigrants there at the time the war broke out....

rep point owed when the rep fairy releases my wand......

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by kshe95girl

You failed to see my point about the Irish, they did not make STL more Southern.

However, Louisville has very similar demographics and income compared to St. Louis yet it is the South. St. Louis, however, had a much more Germanic influence in the 19th century with the Industrial Age and Steamboat Era in full swing. Louisville was a smaller microcosim of St. Louis as both are river cities, both were economically strong in earlier time periods with respect to their peers, and both had a large manufacturing base. If you compare rural demographics between rural areas of KY and rural central MO on southward they are identical. Show me evidence that they really have a lot of differences. I have traveled extensively through many of those areas, have relatives that live in some of those areas, and I know the cultural tendencies of those areas.

[kshe95girl]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

However, Louisville has very similar demographics and income compared to St. Louis yet it is the South. St. Louis, however, had a much more Germanic influence in the 19th century with the Industrial Age and Steamboat Era in full swing. Louisville was a smaller microcosim of St. Louis as both are river cities, both were economically strong in earlier time periods with respect to their peers, and both had a large manufacturing base. If you compare rural demographics between rural areas of KY and rural central MO on southward they are identical. Show me evidence that they really have a lot of differences. I have traveled extensively through many of those areas, have relatives that live in some of those areas, and I know the cultural tendencies of those areas.

Alright, you have too many things going on here......are we speaking of STL>Louisville or rural Ky>rural Mo?
Having lived in both scenarios, I can say they are NOT the same.
I know you have not done the same, so I can speak with slightly more experience.
Please pick what you wish to debate, and we can go from there.

[onegoalstl]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

However, Louisville has very similar demographics and income compared to St. Louis yet it is the South. St. Louis, however, had a much more Germanic influence in the 19th century with the Industrial Age and Steamboat Era in full swing. Louisville was a smaller microcosim of St. Louis as both are river cities, both were economically strong in earlier time periods with respect to their peers, and both had a large manufacturing base. If you compare rural demographics between rural areas of KY and rural central MO on southward they are identical. Show me evidence that they really have a lot of differences. I have traveled extensively through many of those areas, have relatives that live in some of those areas, and I know the cultural tendencies of those areas.

Louisville was pro union during the civil war.

Louisville's winter weather is also similar to stl. Their average high is only a couple degrees warmer.

Also the Missouri Bootheel, I'm talking the two most southern counties of Dunklin and Pemiscott that border TN and AR are more southern than anywhere in Kentucky IMO.