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 mean from a neutral standpoint, any bad thing that's ever happened that people stereotype as "Texan" has happened in Waco or near it, and virtually Waco seems to be the most Texan of places in terms of populace. Like I'm sure a smaller city probably fits better in that regard but of the larger towns, it just seems extremely Texan, with no outside influences, not too many transplants either.
I would probably group the entire Waco-Temple-Killeen two county region together in that regard. Also neither Dallas, College Station or Austin is that far away. The way I see it theirs's nothing about Waco that makes me think it isn't a Texas City, but to be fair most of the smaller cities within Texas are like that.
I mean from a neutral standpoint, any bad thing that's ever happened that people stereotype as "Texan" has happened in Waco or near it, and virtually Waco seems to be the most Texan of places in terms of populace. Like I'm sure a smaller city probably fits better in that regard but of the larger towns, it just seems extremely Texan, with no outside influences, not too many transplants either.
I would probably group the entire Waco-Temple-Killeen two county region together in that regard. Also neither Dallas, College Station or Austin is that far away. The way I see it theirs's nothing about Waco that makes me think it isn't a Texas City, but to be fair most of the smaller cities within Texas are like that.
what bad stereotypically Texan things besides Koresh and the biker shootout have happened in Waco???
Doesn't matter. Texas cities are so large that they're practically coterminous with their core counties. Either way it provides insight on the local demographics in general.
No, it definitely mattrrs. There's a notable change in the percentages for the cities vs. counties.
In any event, you did move the goal posts. First, you tried to say SA is comparable to NOLA demographically. Then when I thoroughly debunked that by pointing up their stark differences in terms of language, race, history and political leadership, you decided to start comparing SA demographically to other Texas cities.
In any event, using the stat about languages other than English spoken in a household doesn't work when making the case that Houston / Dallas are just as integrated with hispanic culture as San Antonio. The first two cities have a considerably larger international population (meaning outside of North America) and a considerably larger domestic population of people from non-Hispanic African /European/Asian descent. So unlke in San Antonio, a significant number of those households in Dallas / Houston likely speak a foreign language other than Spanish.
Since you say it's about providing insight on local demographics, the fact is no matter how you want to spin it, hispanics only make up ~45% of the population in Dallas and Houston, while hispanics make up nearly 65% of the population in San Antonio.
Interesting how this thread has gone a totally different direction from the Ohio one, which is mostly just focusing on name recognition outside the state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
On the other hand, Dallas has the least amount of subreddit subscribers by far. And it’s actually opposite:
Some cities we rarely group with the states they’re in. Chicago is rarely grouped with Illinois for example. San Francisco has extremely great name recognition, but LA is more attached to California than SF. Austin as we know is extremely trendy but definitely seen on its own wether rightfully so or not.
I picked Dallas, because it's just the first city that pops into my head when I hear about Texas. I realize it doesn't fit many of the stereotypical images of Texas. I can certainly see the arguments in favor of Fort Worth and San Antonio. All of these cities "feel" Texan. Houston may be the outlier, because of its Gulf Coast setting and landscape more like the Deep Southeast; nevertheless, it's still very Texan with its big oil, big economy, etc.
To me the stereotypical mental image I have of Texas consists of the big open plains, semi-arid, ranch lands, etc. None of these cities are truly situated in that setting. Maybe the most "Texas" cities are smaller ones in the heart of Texas, like San Angelo or Abilene. Or what about Lubbock and Amarillo?
Dallas could easily be in Oklahoma or even Kansas, it's a Great Plains city with some southern influence thrown in. Yet, I suppose the TV show and the Dallas Cowboys are so iconic that Dallas is the first city that comes to mind when most people think of Texas.
I'd still argue in favor of San Antonio, at least as the "heart" of Texas because of the history (Alamo) and the landscape looks a little more stereotypically Texan.
This puts Dallas in a DISTANT third. Even if you add Fort Worth (with 31,412, which has many cross members), it’s still no where near second. I think I’m buying into the idea that Austin and Houston are more associated individually than Dallas.
What does number of reddit members have to do with which city is associated with Texas?
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.
