Is there any hope of the 3C's ever splitting off into separate states (Columbus: living, versus)

[Mplsite]

Originally Posted by OhioRules

California, New York, Florida, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Texas, Washington, Virginia.

Off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more.

Minnesota easily: St Paul is right across the river but it most definitely is not merely an extension of Minneapolis and really does have its own distinct personality. And yet we get things done in spite of rural-suburban opposition. How bout that?

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by OhioRules

The post I responded to did not say "roughly the same size"

And I wouldn't say Cleveland and Columbus are roughly the same size anyway. Cleveland Metro Area is much larger. And it has many sports, entertainment and cultural offerings that Columbus does not.

I would also say Toledo is much, much different from Cincinnati or Columbus. They happen to all be in Ohio but that's about it for commonality. If any city were going to leave Ohio, Toledo would make the most sense.

Yeah I know it didn't. I'm just saying that your premise is stupid. Ohio has more than 2 cities that are different. There are 3 major ones and they are all different. It's not common to find 3 decently sized cities in the same state like that. The examples you can give are mostly of a state with a giant city and some other small ones.

Also, look up some facts. Cleveland and Columbus have MSA's right around 2 million (granted Cleveland's is slightly larger). Columbus's MSA will likely be larger than Cleveland's in a few years. If you wanna talk CSA, then yes, Cleveland's CSA population is more than 1 million greater than Columbus, but for pracitical purposes, the cities are the same size.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by OhioRules

Who made you arbitrator of what qualifies as a city?? lols.

In Indiana I was comparing Indianapolis to the Chicago suburbs. You ever heard of Spokane? Syracuse? Buffalo?

And the post I responded to did not say the cities were competing. It said they were different. In political philosophy, cultural norms, people's attitudes, that kind of thing.

Technically, a "city" is any incorporated place with 5,000+ people, as designated by the census. To me, a major city has at least 250,000 people, but you also have to consider the relative size of two places. Buffalo, for instance, is a city. Is it comparable in size to NYC? No. It would be like comparing Columbus with Circleville. Both cities, but the similarities end there.

And suburbs aren't a city. Indiana does not have another city anywhere near Indy's size/population. Neither does Washington in regards to Seattle.

Ohio's cities aren't that different culturally, though. Competing due to similar size and close proximity, sure, but they're all very much Midwestern/Great Lakes with only subtle differences.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by OhioRules

The post I responded to did not say "roughly the same size"

And I wouldn't say Cleveland and Columbus are roughly the same size anyway. Cleveland Metro Area is much larger. And it has many sports, entertainment and cultural offerings that Columbus does not.

I would also say Toledo is much, much different from Cincinnati or Columbus. They happen to all be in Ohio but that's about it for commonality. If any city were going to leave Ohio, Toledo would make the most sense.

The 3-C's all have metro populations between 1.94 and 2.13 million. They're very similarly sized. I think you're talking about CSA in regards to Cleveland. CSAs can practically include half a state, so they're less representative, imo, of an individual city.

You're talking about amenities, not culture. I just don't agree that the cities feel that different culturally.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Mplsite

Minnesota easily: St Paul is right across the river but it most definitely is not merely an extension of Minneapolis and really does have its own distinct personality. And yet we get things done in spite of rural-suburban opposition. How bout that?

No one cares.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

The 3-C's all have metro populations between 1.94 and 2.13 million. They're very similarly sized. I think you're talking about CSA in regards to Cleveland. CSAs can practically include half a state, so they're less representative, imo, of an individual city.

You're talking about amenities, not culture. I just don't agree that the cities feel that different culturally.

The cities are pretty different in terms of geography, layout, some amenities, etc., but you're right, as far as culture, they're similar, even with a few differences largely attributed to history. All American cities are pretty similar culturally, in my opinion. Let's not pretend that any places are so radically different unless you're comparing internationally.

[joe from dayton]

I didn't know a state's cities were supposed to have the same feel, vibe and politics. Are there not regional differences in every state?

[Cleverfield]

Originally Posted by Mplsite

Part of the problem is not just that the ultra-conservative, aka out-of-touch suburbs and under-educated rural backwaters are conservative strongholds in SW Ohio, but also NW and plenty of other places throughout the state, especially the burbs. The other much larger problem is that people with half a brain don't get out and vote and so you have big cities essentially under perpetual siege by suburbia and podunk towns.

I now live in a state where the educated urban populace gives the rest of the state the middle finger: we're investing money in dilapidated business districts and neighborhoods (we now coincidentally have way fewer of those per capita than any Ohio city by far), bike infrastructure (all Ohio cities from Cleveland to Cincinnati combined can't compete), trains (two light rail lines and a streetcar coming up soon or more than all Ohio cities), and to all those mean-spirited suburbanites and townfolk we gave them a big f·ck you and legalized same-sex marriage against their will. I suggest moving to a state where the urban population(s) care(s) enough to take the time to vote, because Ohio clearly is not such a state and hasn't been for the longest time. I could never move back.

People with a half a brain don't vote? That's kind of the opposite of the truth. The problem isn't lack of voting by educated people, but rather that a lot of educated people have left the state due to loss of industry. Minneapolis is one of the least diverse cities in the country, and has not seen the urban decay that a lot of cities in Ohio have, and has been able to attract and retain educated people who support such things. It's not just about city-vs.-suburbs/rural that causes the problems in Ohio, it's a much more complicated problem than that, and it has a lot to do with being a blue collar state to begin with, and losing a lot of our educated workforce due to loss of industry. That weakens the cities to the point where we can't defend ourselves adequately from the "rural backwaters".

[jgn2013]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Yep, there really isn't another. You could practically fit the state of Ohio between LA and SF. Texas and Florida may come the closest with Dallas/Houston/Austin and Miami/Tampa/Orlando. But they're not exactly all the same sizes.

Don't forget San Antonio. Honestly it's more S.A., Dallas and Houston. Austin is the capital, and popular with visitors, but it's on a smaller scale than the other three.

[rrtechno]

Originally Posted by Mplsite

Part of the problem is not just that the ultra-conservative, aka out-of-touch suburbs and under-educated rural backwaters are conservative strongholds in SW Ohio, but also NW and plenty of other places throughout the state, especially the burbs. The other much larger problem is that people with half a brain don't get out and vote and so you have big cities essentially under perpetual siege by suburbia and podunk towns.

I now live in a state where the educated urban populace gives the rest of the state the middle finger: we're investing money in dilapidated business districts and neighborhoods (we now coincidentally have way fewer of those per capita than any Ohio city by far), bike infrastructure (all Ohio cities from Cleveland to Cincinnati combined can't compete), trains (two light rail lines and a streetcar coming up soon or more than all Ohio cities), and to all those mean-spirited suburbanites and townfolk we gave them a big f·ck you and legalized same-sex marriage against their will. I suggest moving to a state where the urban population(s) care(s) enough to take the time to vote, because Ohio clearly is not such a state and hasn't been for the longest time. I could never move back.

Dah, ya, but us dumb enedumacated, half-brained, podunk residents might be don't vote because we're to busy volunteering at da schools, or having town wide fund-raisers to help a local family who is battling cancer. We might be out at the park (or in our own backyards), playing catch or frisbee with our kids. We might have been at the park watching the local little league teams. We just don't have time to educate ourselves.

No wait. It is those small, rural communities that have a lower rate of financial difficulties reported, that have fewer elected officials getting accused of fraud and corruption in office, and that get community projects completed quickly. As for bike infrastructure, I can walk or ride bike to any spot in our town, and who really cares how many light rail systems or streetcar lines you have.

As for voting rates, you might want to check out the data from the United States Elections Project. You will see that while the voter turnout rate for the entire country was 58.7%, Ohio's rate was 65.2%. That urban center of New York (probably not your urban area, but hey, I can generalize and stereotype just as well as you) had a rate of 53.6%.

Now, in regards to your last statement, I, for one, sincerely thank you.