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'm not going to argue there. And again, I've never considered the bootheel Midwestern. State lines are political boundaries, not cultural ones. However, the census bureau, however broad it may or may not be, has it right when generalizing states as Midwestern or Southern with the exception of MD and DE. What I will say about West Virginia is that as a whole state leans more Southern than anything else, to a much greater degree than Missouri. Same thing with Kentucky. The border states went their separate ways after the Civil War. MO as a state leaned overall Midwestern, MD and DE overall Northeastern, and KY and WV overall Southern.
There was a map someone posted in the past and I have it saved somewhere that shaded in what areas are transition midwestern, and dixie. It was pretty accurate showing about 25 percent of Missouri Dixie. Basically in the Ozarks about 50 miles or so from Arkansas state line, and starting at Cape Girardeau.
Here is a better map I found and I pretty much agree with. This map shows about 25 percent of MO in the south and the west lower midwest. However south of the MO river there should be sections labeled transition zone.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,499 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by onegoalstl
Here is a better map I found and I pretty much agree with. This map shows about 25 percent of MO in the south and the west lower midwest. However south of the MO river there should be sections labeled transition zone.
Anyways shows it begins around Cape Girardeau.
That's actually not that bad. I could accept this map. I don't think Detroit and Cleveland belong in the same region as Buffalo or Erie. I know some would disagree on this, but they are Midwestern. Buffalo and Erie IMO aren't.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,499 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by onegoalstl
A large factor in that was the Drake Constitution. A lot of Confederates from Missouri moved to Kentucky, Oklahoma, after the war because they couldn't practice law, be doctors, or vote. Of course about 10 years later the Supreme Court got involved on it, and finally they were able to vote, and hold office, but a lot of them moved away. That explains why Kentucky gained southerness after the civil war was because confederates from Missouri and other reconstructed states moved to KY so they could have their rights restored.
If Missouri didn't have the Drake constitution it probably would still have a little more southern leanings today.
A few were finally able to get back into office. Like Marmaduke became governor of MO.
It does seem though Missouri really started to lean more Midwestern the last 80 or so years.
Heck MO was always lumped in with the "solid south" during the president elections because they favored Democrats.
During the Civil Rights movement, the southern Missouri congressmen voted against the civil rights act and voting rights act, and the congressman from Ike Skelton's district at the time voted against it as well, and all the stl area ones voted for the act as well as northern MO. So it does kinda show how North and South Missouri differ.
Missouri also nearly passed a poll tax in 1908 but very narrowly got voted down by a couple St. Louis Republicans.
All and all I blame the Drake Constitution a large part for the loss of southerness. Hence why Kentucky attracted ex confederates.
if Missouri wasn't reconstructed on the state level and Claiborne Jackson and our elected officials were not chased out of office, Missouri would have been different.
I'll agree to your map, I'd be willing to debate the Drake Constitution, simply because a lot of those "confederate" Missourians were actually native Kentuckians anyway, plus Kentucky had plenty of Southern-leaning natives on its own. As far as being lumped in with the Solid South, that's a political definition I've never understood, particularly because since 1904 Missouri has only not supported the winning candidate in two elections.
I'll agree to your map, I'd be willing to debate the Drake Constitution, simply because a lot of those "confederate" Missourians were actually native Kentuckians anyway, plus Kentucky had plenty of Southern-leaning natives on its own. As far as being lumped in with the Solid South, that's a political definition I've never understood, particularly because since 1904 Missouri has only not supported the winning candidate in two elections.
Well KY and MO after the civil war up until the end of the 60s were controlled by Democrats. However though they didn't have total domination like other southern states. kentucky and Missouri still elected Republican governors and voted Republican once in awhile. You can go on wiki and look at the list of MO and KY elected officials post civil war up until the 60s. Democrats dominate, but dont win ever single election like they did in deep south states.
In general up until Nixon got elected the Democrat party in general was dominating the United states at most levels of local and state, federal government.
If missouri passed their poll tax in 1908, then we would have seen total domination by Democrats in Missouri until the voting rights act in 1965. It would have also made Missouri a bigger battle ground during the civil rights movement for voting rights.
Uh, Pennsylvania and Ohio are upland Appalachian with more of a Rust Belt feel and definitely not very southern compare to Missouri. Ask most people from Iowa northward if they classify southern MO the South and the answer is usually a resounding yes.
Heres the problem with your last sentence......asking people from another state to define another region is not exactly what I would call reliable information.
I could say, for instance, that Iowa is like Canada.......but is it true?
Here is a better map I found and I pretty much agree with. This map shows about 25 percent of MO in the south and the west lower midwest. However south of the MO river there should be sections labeled transition zone.
Anyways shows it begins around Cape Girardeau.
No, that map is not accurate at all, the Mississippi Hills region in Missouri is NOT the Mid South, in any way, shape, or form.
Its Midwestern.
Heres the problem with your last sentence......asking people from another state to define another region is not exactly what I would call reliable information.
I could say, for instance, that Iowa is like Canada.......but is it true?
I had a teacher this past summer who was from Iowa. He's lived in Missouri for the last 25 years. He said when you cross over into Missouri he mentioned how it feels totally different crossing the state line, and said he thought MO people talked slower, and mentioned how Missouri feels bible beltish compared to Iowa.
He is right about the bible belt. Right when you cross into MO protestant religions are in the majority except for Eastern MO and a few other small pockets. same with with Oklahoma and the KS border. Just amazing how do states bordering each other can have totally different religions. I guess that has to do with settlers who came to Missouri and still to this day there are many baptist. They settled in MO to farm since it was a slave state and Iowa wasn't
Looking at the map it might extend 10-15 miles too north in far Eastern MO Perry county, but at least it's fairly close.
YOu can't be perfect.
Actaully, yes, you can.
Thats like saying you think the bridge you just built will hold the weight load.
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.
