Objectively, how liberal/progressive is Chicago *compared to other large American cities*? (Lincoln: low income, sales)

[DougStark]

Originally Posted by agun77

Actually, the Loop and the North Side (especially Logan Square and the lakefront neighborhoods) are booming with large influxes of liberal millennial yuppies. However, the City of Chicago overall is experiencing a net population loss because the growth in these neighborhoods can't compensate for the hemorrhage of residents on the South and West Sides (where the overwhelming majority of the city's violent crimes occur.)

I know I'm going off-topic from the thread here, but I bristle when people define Chicago by its crime rate and talk as though the whole city is a war zone. Most of the city's violent crimes are concentrated in a handful of neighborhoods, and as long as you stay out of those areas, your chances of being mugged or shot should be minuscule. The same phenomenon applies to crime in most other cities: every city has areas where crime rates are particularly high. That said, I do NOT mean to imply that Chicago doesn't have a major crime problem; the statistics, news stories, and traumatic experiences of many South and West Siders most certainly suggest otherwise. All I'm saying is that too many people simply write off the entire city, which I don't think is fair at all.

"Not very much recreational opportunities?" There's Navy Pier, Museum Campus, Lincoln Park Zoo, the Art Institute, the Museum of Science & Industry, the Magnificent Mile, the White Sox, the Cubs, the Bulls, the Bears, numerous parks, and plenty of beaches, just to name a few. Whoever thinks Chicago has a shortage of recreational opportunities either hasn't spent much time in the city or hasn't bothered to do his research.

Yes, I acknowledge the wonderful attractions Chicago has; you've named many of them, but they're all man-made!! And other cities have these amenities too! (sports teams, zoos, museums.) When I say Chicago lacks recreational opportunities, I'm comparing it to cities that have mountains, national parks, oceans, skiing nearby (think Seattle, Denver, any CA city, Phoenix, Salt Lake, etc.)

Chicago is blessed with Lake Michigan. Other than that, it's a boring place to live for someone who loves the great outdoors. It's mostly flat corn fields! And the weather stinks half the year.

[damba]

Originally Posted by DougStark

Yeah, I'll concede that what you state is true. But from what I've seen in the media, Chicago isn't mentioned nearly as much of a millennial draw as the other high-tech cities I mentioned. Unfortunately most news on TV re: Chicago is in regard to the high murder rate.

Appreciate the candor, but why post (above) without vetting first what you see/hear in the media(?)

[smegmatite]

Originally Posted by DougStark

Yes, I acknowledge the wonderful attractions Chicago has; you've named many of them, but they're all man-made!! And other cities have these amenities too! (sports teams, zoos, museums.) When I say Chicago lacks recreational opportunities, I'm comparing it to cities that have mountains, national parks, oceans, skiing nearby (think Seattle, Denver, any CA city, Phoenix, Salt Lake, etc.)

Chicago is blessed with Lake Michigan. Other than that, it's a boring place to live for someone who loves the great outdoors. It's mostly flat corn fields! And the weather stinks half the year.

Chicago is definitely all about the great indoors

[agun77]

Originally Posted by DougStark

Yes, I acknowledge the wonderful attractions Chicago has; you've named many of them, but they're all man-made!! And other cities have these amenities too! (sports teams, zoos, museums.) When I say Chicago lacks recreational opportunities, I'm comparing it to cities that have mountains, national parks, oceans, skiing nearby (think Seattle, Denver, any CA city, Phoenix, Salt Lake, etc.)

Chicago is blessed with Lake Michigan. Other than that, it's a boring place to live for someone who loves the great outdoors. It's mostly flat corn fields! And the weather stinks half the year.

Fair enough. Admittedly, I've always been more of an indoor person with a fondness for concrete, brick, steel, and glass than an outdoor nature-lover, so I've never been bothered by this. The same can't be said for many of my college classmates in the San Francisco Bay Area, who've all either hiked in the Berkeley Hills, visited Yosemite, gone to Pacific beaches, or skied at Lake Tahoe at least once. In contrast, my idea of experiencing nature is visiting the Presidio or Golden Gate Park.

[Hiruko]

Originally Posted by DougStark

Yes, I acknowledge the wonderful attractions Chicago has; you've named many of them, but they're all man-made!! And other cities have these amenities too! (sports teams, zoos, museums.) When I say Chicago lacks recreational opportunities, I'm comparing it to cities that have mountains, national parks, oceans, skiing nearby (think Seattle, Denver, any CA city, Phoenix, Salt Lake, etc.)

Chicago is blessed with Lake Michigan. Other than that, it's a boring place to live for someone who loves the great outdoors. It's mostly flat corn fields! And the weather stinks half the year.

Originally Posted by agun77

Fair enough. Admittedly, I've always been more of an indoor person with a fondness for concrete, brick, steel, and glass than an outdoor nature-lover, so I've never been bothered by this. The same can't be said for many of my college classmates in the San Francisco Bay Area, who've all either hiked in the Berkeley Hills, visited Yosemite, gone to Pacific beaches, or skied at Lake Tahoe at least once. In contrast, my idea of experiencing nature is visiting the Presidio or Golden Gate Park.

I am very outdoorsy and active. I bicycle (up to 65 miles in a day), hike multiple times per week, go to the beach, snowmobile, ski, play hockey, play volleyball, and sail. Chicagoland has excellent land use regulations and there is a tremendous amount of green space and forests available to the public in both the city and suburbs. Midwest skiing isn't the best, but there is a Vail-owned resort just an hour from the city. I think Chicago is a very good city for outdoor activities. I'd say it's better than Phoenix. Corn fields are not something I see unless I travel hours outside of the city.

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by damba

Appreciate the candor, but why post (above) without vetting first what you see/hear in the media(?)

There's an underlying political narrative behind the presentation of crime in Chicago, both in traditional media and in shares/retweets you might see on your favorite social media soul void. It typically conveys implications that involve items such as:

-Gun laws
-Government corruption in Chicago and/or Illinois, real and perceived alike
-Race/socioeconomics
-Barack Obama

And it advances a talking point that doesn't play as well if we were talking about crime in, say, Atlanta or Cincinnati.

It's mutated into a political football that ultimately trivializes the actual scope and impact of such crime in Chicago and American society in general.

Fact matters little when you can reshare the previous year's Fourth of July weekend body count blurb when nobody actually gets killed on the current year's Fourth of July weekend, and get spread all over once again.

[fusillirob1983]

What other posters have stated is accurate. There are a lot of millennial transplants moving to Chicago. As others have pointed out, they've literally kept Chicago's population from declining further. In my last decade working for Chicago-based companies, there's never been a shortage of new employees annually who grew up out of state.

Also, as others mentioned, it tends to be people who get jobs after a Big Ten education, or other schools I'll commonly meet people from are Marquette, Notre Dame and Miami (OH).

Perhaps the national media talks about Chicago crime, but to someone who grew up near Detroit, Cleveland or St. Louis for instance and have visited Chicago, I don't think media reports that don't give the full picture of Chicago crime have affected their decision.

[walker1962]

[quote=goofy328;54580651]This thread, is why the Chicago/New York, or Chicago/Houston comparisons are silly and fruitless. People still don't get it.[/QUOT

Chicago/Houston comparisons? Is someone saying Houston is more or less conservative? it's certainly as diverse as Chicago.

[walker1962]

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/ce...by-county.html

The above link shows how much one's county is populated by people born and raised there. Given some of the discussion about transplants in Chicago, I thought it might enlightened even further.


https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...judice/583072/

[damba]

Originally Posted by walker1962

Born and Raised: The Parts of America With the Most Natives

The above link shows how much one's county is populated by people born and raised there. Given some of the discussion about transplants in Chicago, I thought it might enlightened even further.


https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...judice/583072/

That first data set doesn’t really help per se.