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.
Really? All I see is Austin bashing everywhere and the votes reflect that. Not saying KC is a bad city but it clearly has no business beating Austin by 20 votes.
Why do you feel that Kansas City should not be beating Austin?
Why do you feel that Kansas City should not be beating Austin?
Austin has a better economy, better weather (for me), better music, better nightlife more diverse, is growing faster, better downtown, better scenery IMO, and also a better locations (closer to the beach and other major cities. I can understand why people would prefer KC, it's more affordable and has more of a 4 season climate, but I don't see how anyone can justify it winning by this much. I swear some of those KC votes are just Austin haters.
Really? All I see is Austin bashing everywhere and the votes reflect that. Not saying KC is a bad city but it clearly has no business beating Austin by 20 votes.
Well there are two possible reasons why:
1. People sincerely hate Austin and are voting for KC because it's a vote against Austin. You could theoretically test that theory by polling it against a truly inferior city like OKC. But this theory begs the question of why Austin is so apparently worthy of bashing? For the record I don't think it is and don't subscribe to this theory.
Or there is the other option:
2. More voters simply prefer KC over Austin as opposed to having a vendetta against the latter. This seems the more reasonable explanation, and the categorical rejection of that premise reflects a bit of arrogance or at the very least overconfidence.
The shock from Austin folks at KC over Austin and saying it must be because people "hate" Austin is one of the reasons why Austin gets a bad rep as far as residents go. They believe they are SF or even Seattle when they are actually still Austin.
Austin has a better economy, better weather (for me), better music, better nightlife more diverse, is growing faster, better downtown, better scenery IMO, and also a better locations (closer to the beach and other major cities. I can understand why people would prefer KC.....
All of these things have been refuted and you simply refuse real facts.
There is 20X more info and photos about KC posted here than the Austin supporters have posted. But you refuse to check it out because your mind is made up. Don't demand that others stick their head in the sand as you have.
I can tell from your posts that you have never been to KC (outside of possibly changing planes).
The shock from Austin folks at KC over Austin and saying it must be because people "hate" Austin is one of the reasons why Austin gets a bad rep as far as residents go. They believe they are SF or even Seattle when they are actually still Austin.
No one actually believes Austin is SF or Seattle. It's not really in the same category as either of those.
All of these things have been refuted and you simply refuse real facts.
There is 20X more info and photos about KC posted here than the Austin supporters have posted. But you refuse to check it out because your mind is made up. Don't demand that others stick their head in the sand as you have.
I can tell from your posts that you have never been to KC (outside of possibly changing planes).
Yup that's it, not sure I want to visit now though. Not if this thread is a representation of most KC supporters. I really hope it isn't. KC bbq seems nice.
Austin has a better economy, better weather (for me), better music, better nightlife more diverse, is growing faster, better downtown, better scenery IMO, and also a better locations (closer to the beach and other major cities. I can understand why people would prefer KC, it's more affordable and has more of a 4 season climate, but I don't see how anyone can justify it winning by this much. I swear some of those KC votes are just Austin haters.
Austin's nightlife isn't even diverse to begin with.
Anyway, when people talk about a city's greenery, they mean the foliage in general, not whether or not it is green the whole year. Boston has much more beautiful vegetation than Los Angeles in my opinion, even if Los Angeles stays green year round.
Some posters talked about KC's climate supporting more greenery, so I put forth angles of consideration. KC is indeed greener in terms of verdance, but Austin's warmer winter climate allows for more year-round green to be seen.
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.
