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.
The correct answer for the Northeast is Boston- Philadelphia may be second largest by population, but it is a little less independent of NYC's influence compared to Boston, which anchors its own subregion (New England). Plus, Philly's sphere of influence extends down into NE MD and northern Delaware, which are borderline southern.
I'm still siding for Detroit as the Midwest's second city. It was by far the second largest city in the region at its peak, and it shows in some of its grandiose pre-war architecture. It, along with Chicago, is the only city in its region to have the MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL within city limits. And the suburban regions for Detroit are more extensively developed compared to the Twin Cities.
Dallas is my pick for the South's second city. DC is too tied to the Northeast, Miami too focused outside of the South, and Houston, while a viable contender and my no. 3 for the region, doesn't seem to have the regional pull to the degree that Dallas has. Houston only really draws from central/southern Louisiana, while Dallas draws from Oklahoma, Arkansas, northern Louisiana, western Tennessee, and northwestern Mississippi, and the connection between Austin/San Antonio seems to have a greater pull towards DFW than Houston. If Dallas was more centrally located within the region like Atlanta is, it likely would be my #1 pick, but its a bit weak on the cultural branding department.
San Francisco may be overall the second city for the West, but its Seattle in terms of corporate activity and Phoenix for overall metropolitan sprawl and city population.
Uh, I have always thought of Maryland and Delaware as part of the mid-Atlantic region, not sure why the census doesn't recognize it as such.
That’s one of those weird ones. I think being from the west coast, I don’t understand this mid-Atlantic thing. There’s the northeast and the southeast, and I don’t get what makes the mid Atlantic the mid Atlantic. I also have a similar trouble with New England and what makes it a specific thing apart from or within the northeast.
For the Northeast I nominate DC, the Midwest I think is a tough one but it might be Minneapolis, but a reasonable case could be made for Columbus. Sadly I think St. Louis isn’t in the running, and I’m not entirely sure Detroit can be either. The South is the trickiest of them all, because I’m not sure what the number one city is. I won’t say Atlanta isn’t it, but there’s a lot of powerhouses in the south, so sorting out number two is a toughie. New Orleans maybe? It used to be THE city in the south and it still has outsize cultural meaning and isn’t a small piece of the American petrochemical pie either. The west has been well-covered.
Northeast- 1. NYC, 2. Boston
Midwest - 1. Chicago 2. Minneapolis
South - 1. None, 2. Charlotte
West. 1. LA 2. San Francisco
It seems like a dubious claim to make that Charlotte is the best of the 2nd tier cities. Why is it better than Austin, Nashville, Orlando, or Tampa? Not saying it isn’t, but if you ignored #1 due to it being too debatable I don’t think #2 is any clearer.
It seems like a dubious claim to make that Charlotte is the best of the 2nd tier cities. Why is it better than Austin, Nashville, Orlando, or Tampa? Not saying it isn’t, but if you ignored #1 due to it being too debatable I don’t think #2 is any clearer.
How can any of those cities be #2 when there are 4 cities in front of the entire group?
The thing about DC is, it's not a regional city in the way the other heavyweights are.
The other regional cities with national significance (New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, Houston — yes, Houston, Miami, Atlanta...) are culturally rooted in their regions.
The rise of the Federal government since World War II has in a very important sense unmoored Washington from its region — and there's some disagreement on what region to put it in, depending on how one slices and dices the Northeastern and Southeastern United States.
The Federal City, diverse though its politics and economy may be, is defined by its biggest employer much as Detroit is defined by its biggest employer. And the Federal Government's influence in a sense transcends regions or regionalism.
That said, you still have to put it in one —*and even though the OMB puts it and neighbor Baltimore in the Southeast, I'd put both in the Northeast now even though Virginia is a Southern state and Maryland has historical ties to the South (and vestiges of cultural ones still). And if that's the case, well, DC is the second city of the Northeast after New York, the above notwithstanding. However, I'd say that in terms of cultural influence, both Boston and Philly outrank it.
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.
Basically insert A Big 4 and let Charlotte be the 2nd City