Is Texas more Western or Southern? (Dallas, San Antonio: food, education, clothes)

[polo89]

Originally Posted by jluke65780

I think they are southern; Western South to be more specific. If you placed the Austin and San Antonio area within the Western parts of the US; they would stick out like a sore thumb.

To other southerners; Texas is consider western, but many Texans will claim to be southerners before westerners.

Vice Versa if you stuck Austin and SA in the Southeast they'd stick out almost as much as Miami.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by polo89

Vice Versa if you stuck Austin and SA in the Southeast they'd stick out almost as much as Miami.

Austin really wouldn't imo. San Antonio would though.

[WestbankNOLA]

It seems to me that polo's idea of southern is the southeast. In that case the south stops ends just a liitle west of Alabama. If I'm not mistaken I can remember arguing against the stereotypical south polo, now it seems like the exact opposite. Only 4 out of 10+ southern states even fit that description.

[JimmyJohnWilson]

Originally Posted by WestbankNOLA

It seems to me that polo's idea of southern is the southeast. In that case the south stops ends just a liitle west of Alabama. If I'm not mistaken I can remember arguing against the stereotypical south polo, now it seems like the exact opposite. Only 4 out of 10+ southern states even fit that description.

no, thats not true at all. the southeast stops in texas. basically the southeast ends when the terrain becomes drier and praire like
http://bsi.montana.edu/prairiemap/files/images/PrairieMap_ecoregions1.jpg (broken link)
and pretty much all southern states fit the description of lush/humid
http://www.geog.nau.edu/courses/alew/ggr346/text/maps/us_precip.gif (broken link)
you notice that right at the precipitation gets into the range of 35 to 40 inches the praires begin.

geographically, climatically, and argriculturally texas west of east texas is not southeast, and is praire country until you hit the transpecos, which is geographically, climactically, and agriculturally southwest.

but like i said earlier, texas is in the west, but it is culturally southern (at least most of it is). it is in the west in the sense that it is geographically western, but culturally it is southern. "southern" does not refer to geography, otherwise arizona would be an undisputed southern state simply from looking at a map.

texas is both southern and western, the way georgia is southern and eastern.

[polo89]

Originally Posted by jluke65780

Austin really wouldn't imo. San Antonio would though.

Austin would for sure. HECK, Austin sticks out in Texas.

[polo89]

Originally Posted by WestbankNOLA

It seems to me that polo's idea of southern is the southeast. In that case the south stops ends just a liitle west of Alabama. If I'm not mistaken I can remember arguing against the stereotypical south polo, now it seems like the exact opposite. Only 4 out of 10+ southern states even fit that description.

The South(to me) extends from East Texas to the Atlantic.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by JimmyJohnWilson

no, thats not true at all. the southeast stops in texas. basically the southeast ends when the terrain becomes drier and praire like

and pretty much all southern states fit the description of lush/humid

you notice that right at the precipitation gets into the range of 35 to 40 inches the praires begin.

geographically, climatically, and argriculturally texas west of east texas is not southeast, and is praire country until you hit the transpecos, which is geographically, climactically, and agriculturally southwest.

but like i said earlier, texas is in the west, but it is culturally southern (at least most of it is). it is in the west in the sense that it is geographically western, but culturally it is southern. "southern" does not refer to geography, otherwise arizona would be an undisputed southern state simply from looking at a map.

texas is both southern and western, the way georgia is southern and eastern.

The Southeast doesn't include ANY parts of Texas.

[polo89]

Originally Posted by JimmyJohnWilson

no, thats not true at all. the southeast stops in texas. basically the southeast ends when the terrain becomes drier and praire like

and pretty much all southern states fit the description of lush/humid

you notice that right at the precipitation gets into the range of 35 to 40 inches the praires begin.

geographically, climatically, and argriculturally texas west of east texas is not southeast, and is praire country until you hit the transpecos, which is geographically, climactically, and agriculturally southwest.

but like i said earlier, texas is in the west, but it is culturally southern (at least most of it is). it is in the west in the sense that it is geographically western, but culturally it is southern. "southern" does not refer to geography, otherwise arizona would be an undisputed southern state simply from looking at a map.

texas is both southern and western, the way georgia is southern and eastern.

That map says it all. Everything you posted is EXACTLY what I meant.

[AlGreen]

Originally Posted by JimmyJohnWilson

no, thats not true at all. the southeast stops in texas. basically the southeast ends when the terrain becomes drier and praire like

i agree with that, and that's a good map. but i think westbanknola is referring to the southeast as in "the south, east of the mississippi"

[JimmyJohnWilson]

Originally Posted by jluke65780

The Southeast doesn't include ANY parts of Texas.

no east texas is clearly part of the southeast in climate, forest-type, agriculturally and culturally. if the state line wasnt there you wouldnt be separating it from louisiana