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.
It's not about self identifying. It's what the respondents thought was the Midwest. I think that means that people in the eastern Midwest don't view the plains states as Midwestern more than it means those folks don't self identify.
Yes, you're right. I don't think the results would change much if it was self identifying.
Interesting. The more eastern states consider themselves to be in the Midwest more than the plains states. Not surprising tbh. These states were Midwestern before the more centrally located plains states.
Yes. The old Northwest Territory, established in 1781, comprised what is now Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and the northeastern third of Minnesota. Now, the Northwest doesn't even begin for hundreds of miles west of its old westernmost terminus. And of course the West once started at the crest of the Appalachians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicala
The Midwest isn't a matter of opinion. It is what the government has deemed it to be....people don't get to take a poll to decide. Another random 538 people might choose differently, lol.
Uh... no. That's not how language works.
Spoiler: ketchup and relish have never been vegetables, either, regardless of government policy in the early '80s because, again, that's not how language works.
And, yes, people do decide what words mean. English has no official academy. It is not governed. Usage defines the language. Don't like the fact that usage defines Midwest? Too bad - it does. And it's a nebulous, moving target.
Atlanta?
I wouldn't go beyond Cincinnati with that line.
Maybe it needs to be ditched in favor of Plains and Great Lakes. Culturally, that might make more sense, but then what to do with Missouri and Iowa?
.
I would consider Kentucky as mostly southern and Appalachian. The line could stop where it crosses the Ohio River.
I think there is an identity confusion among "Midwest" regions. Heartland sometimes being used as a label in Missouri and eastern Kansas. Mississippi Valley is another label as is Missouri Valley. Great Plains and Great Lakes make some sense. Some states are in more than one region.
Quote:
Originally Posted by R1070
Atlanta?! And Columbus, Cleveland, etc. aren't the Midwest to you?
Cleveland is eastern while Columbus is sort of on the line.
I think the boundaries depend somewhat on the perspective of your own location and geography. The Midwest begins mostly at the prairies as opposed to the foothills and Appalachians. Once you get much beyond Lawrence and Topeka and Omaha you are on the Great Plains. Maybe Tulsa as well.
The different Federal agencies do not conform to a single definition of regions. The Census Bureau is one version that carries some weight. If everyone agreed, then we would not be having this discussion.
I've never even understood the slight notion that any part of PA would be Midwestern. A quintessential Eastern state that was one of the nation's original colonies, and whose eastern border is less than 50 miles from the Atlantic coast, should not even be in this conversation. Certainly not anything I'd ever encountered until reading city-data.
The idea of any part of Pennsylvania being Midwestern is just as weird as the idea of any part of Colorado being Midwestern. Just because western Pennsylvania is different from New York City doesn't mean it's not Northeastern, just as Colorado being different from California doesn't mean it's not Western.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duderino
If anything, Eastern Ohio is a transition zone, for its heavier Northeastern/New England influences and topography.
My parents are Missouri natives, and they always said the Midwest begins to fade away on I-70 east of Columbus.
Quite frankly, I don't think anybody who lives on the extreme ends of the United States is in any position to determine where one region of the country ends and another begins. I've heard New Englanders label anyplace west of I-81 as the Midwest, Minnesotans label anyplace south of I-80 as the South, people along the Gulf Coast classify Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee as the North, and people on the West Coast classify the Rocky Mountain states as the Midwest. No, no, no and no, respectively.
I was surprised to see the Dakotas viewed as equally Midwestern to Oklahoma by that poll.
Growing up I thought of all of that as part of the Midwest, but now view the Dakotas as solidly Midwestern, but view Oklahoma as split between Midwestern, Southern, and Southwestern, depending on where you are in the state.
Oklahoma residents must be a bit confused regarding geography. The very low latitude of the state will never change, and it isn't northern at all compared to the Midwest. It does share some commonalities in terms of agriculture with the Great Plains states, but that is it. The southern and southwest influences are stronger overall.
Oklahoma residents must be a bit confused regarding geography. The very low latitude of the state will never change, and it isn't northern at all compared to the Midwest. It does share some commonalities in terms of agriculture with the Great Plains states, but that is it. The southern and southwest influences are stronger overall.
I would consider Kentucky as mostly southern and Appalachian. The line could stop where it crosses the Ohio River.
I think there is an identity confusion among "Midwest" regions. Heartland sometimes being used as a label in Missouri and eastern Kansas. Mississippi Valley is another label as is Missouri Valley. Great Plains and Great Lakes make some sense. Some states are in more than one region.
Cleveland is eastern while Columbus is sort of on the line.
I think the boundaries depend somewhat on the perspective of your own location and geography. The Midwest begins mostly at the prairies as opposed to the foothills and Appalachians. Once you get much beyond Lawrence and Topeka and Omaha you are on the Great Plains. Maybe Tulsa as well.
The different Federal agencies do not conform to a single definition of regions. The Census Bureau is one version that carries some weight. If everyone agreed, then we would not be having this discussion.
Minnesota would be the one that comes to mind the most. Northeastern MN is the North Shore and fully dominated by Lake Superior. SW Minnesota is vast, level prairie that's basically the start of the plains, and you have a zone of transition between the two. There are significant cultural differences between the two as well, with the northeast being more left of center like you see in the Great Lakes states and western Minnesota being as conservative as the Frontier Strip.
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.
