Where does Missouri fit?

[Pessimistic Antineutrino]

I've been curious as to what region Missouri lies in. Specifically, would you place it as part of the Upper South, with states like Tennessee and Kentucky, or part of the Midwest, grouped with states like Iowa and Illinois.

Right now it clearly fits with the South better in terms of recent voting patterns, but historically it's been a very "Midwestern" state, its voting history very similar to states like Ohio.

[Gass3268]

Based on my own experiences in the state, black areas are Midwestern and gold areas are Southern:

[jimrtex]

I've been curious as to what region Missouri lies in. Specifically, would you place it as part of the Upper South, with states like Tennessee and Kentucky, or part of the Midwest, grouped with states like Iowa and Illinois.

Right now it clearly fits with the South better in terms of recent voting patterns, but historically it's been a very "Midwestern" state, its voting history very similar to states like Ohio.

Missouri has voted with Tennessee and Kentucky since 1964.

On the other hand, until the last two elections, Ohio had voted with the Kentucky and Tennessee even longer.

You will find that much of the early settlement of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois was south to north, having come down through the Cumberland Gap and then northward across the Ohio River, and up the rivers.

[opebo]

Unfortunately, we have a lot of the Southern and Plains culture.  We're maybe 1/3 each: 1. proper civilized Midwestern (St. Louis mostly), 2. Arkansas/Tennessee style in the southern half of the state, and 3. sort of Kansas-like (rather than Iowa-like, alas) in the north.  So the State is about 2/3's horrific, 1/3 barely tolerable.

[ElectionsGuy]

I would say most of land below St. Louis and Kansas City is Southern. And St. Louis, Kansas City, and the North is Midwestern. The Northern parts of the state are too moderate to be southern, considering how incredibly white they are, like Iowa. The thing I see that always bugs me is that in Northern Missouri most counties went >60% Romney, yet right when you go into Iowa you're immediately into swing/toss-up land. Kind of like the Tennessee/North Carolina thing.

[hopper]

Its part of the Southeast now. Its votes with the Deep South now and plus Missouri in College Athletics moved out of the Big 12 and into the SEC. Even the former basketball coach of Missouri went to Arkansas to be head coach there. I know he was an assistant under Nolan Richardson when the Razorbacks were good in the first half of the 90's and won a national championship in '94.

[muon2]

I'd agree with Opebo that MO splits into thirds. However, I drive across the northern half of MO frequently, so I'd expand the Plains area beyond his description. In the northeast I'd extend the St Louis area all the way up through Hannibal to IA and over to Kirksville.

The KC corner extends south most of the way along the KS border, stopping north of Joplin, but staying west of the Truman reservoir. In the north the KC area extend a little east of the I-5 corridor, to include Chillicothe.

That leaves Little Dixie north of Columbia with the Ozark Plateau in the south to make up the Southern-leaning region. However, my drives make me think that Little Dixie is getting more Plains and less Dixie as time goes on. As an aside I'd put the Bootheel in its own category, still southern, but more like the rest of the Mississippi Delta than like the hill country that defines the Ozark region.

[TDAS04]

I would say most of land below St. Louis and Kansas City is Southern. And St. Louis, Kansas City, and the North is Midwestern. The Northern parts of the state are too moderate to be southern, considering how incredibly white they are, like Iowa. The thing I see that always bugs me is that in Northern Missouri most counties went >60% Romney, yet right when you go into Iowa you're immediately into swing/toss-up land. Kind of like the Tennessee/North Carolina thing.

Iowa and Missouri are very different.  I'm originally from Southern Iowa, where people speak with a flat accent, but when I was in Northern Missouri, people definitely had a twang.

I do consider Missouri to be a Southern state, culturally (aside from St. Louis and maybe Kansas City). 

[opebo]

Iowa and Missouri are very different.  I'm originally from Southern Iowa, where people speak with a flat accent, but when I was in Northern Missouri, people definitely had a twang.

When we use to go on family holidays to Iowa it was like crossing into civilization again after the Missouri rural areas.

[muon2]

Iowa and Missouri are very different.  I'm originally from Southern Iowa, where people speak with a flat accent, but when I was in Northern Missouri, people definitely had a twang.

But it's not a southern twang. It's the same sound you'd hear in central IL or IN as well as in KC. The conservatism there is more like KS than like AR. BTW, are you from SW or SE IA?

[TDAS04]

Iowa and Missouri are very different.  I'm originally from Southern Iowa, where people speak with a flat accent, but when I was in Northern Missouri, people definitely had a twang.

But it's not a southern twang. It's the same sound you'd hear in central IL or IN as well as in KC. The conservatism there is more like KS than like AR. BTW, are you from SW or SE IA?

SE (Iowa City). 

[ElectionsGuy]

I would say most of land below St. Louis and Kansas City is Southern. And St. Louis, Kansas City, and the North is Midwestern. The Northern parts of the state are too moderate to be southern, considering how incredibly white they are, like Iowa. The thing I see that always bugs me is that in Northern Missouri most counties went >60% Romney, yet right when you go into Iowa you're immediately into swing/toss-up land. Kind of like the Tennessee/North Carolina thing.

Iowa and Missouri are very different.  I'm originally from Southern Iowa, where people speak with a flat accent, but when I was in Northern Missouri, people definitely had a twang.

I do consider Missouri to be a Southern state, culturally (aside from St. Louis and maybe Kansas City). 

Huh, thanks for informing me on the accents, never knew. Click on this and put your cursor at the "counties" box on the left, and look closely. There is a clear, abrupt, change once you leave Iowa. There are Romney >70% counties bordering Romney >50% counties, its just really strange. Same thing with Nebraska, once you leave Iowa, your abruptly into conservative land. I always like to think Iowa has a invisible box around it controlling the state's elections and politics, but I can't get over it.

I know the cultures are different and the way people speak is different, but what I would be interested to know is why does it change so fast across one state border, it doesn't seem to be a progressive change but just an abrupt change. There has to be something unique about Iowa's economy, people, etc. That changes their political views so much from Missouri's in such a short amount of space/land.

[pbrower2a]

Could it be a religious divide?

[muon2]

Could it be a religious divide?

This is the only really southern aspect of northern MO. The state was part of the split that formed the Southern Baptist Convention, and the denomination remains strong right up to, but not across the IA border.

[ElectionsGuy]

Could it be a religious divide?

I think the answer is yes.

[pbrower2a]

Could it be a religious divide?

I think the answer is yes.

I so thought; I hadn't seen the map for months. Unless African-American, Baptists seem to be out of reach to Barack Obama. Contrast the Roman Catholics, a much more cosmopolitan lot. This could be bigger than the urban-rural divide. It helps explain why some urban areas  in Texas (notably Amarillo, Lubbock, Wichita Falls, and Abilene) are out of reach for liberals and why Tarrant County (even if it contains Fort Worth) is more R than D despite being highly urban. It also explains the regional divide within Florida (go north in Florida to find the political South) .

The Catholic Church may have a theology that looks cranky to any devout non-Catholic -- but know well that the Catholic Church is very rationalist on economics and science. The Catholic Church may have wanted Catholic immigrant families to toe the line on theology, but never wanted Catholics of any origin to become a permanent underclass. It has first-rate colleges -- try naming a first-rate college associated with the Baptist Church. To be sure, "leading church body" does not itself imply a majority, but it can say much about local attitudes. A religious body that holds the majority of both Filipino-Americans and Polish- Americans is by necessity cosmopolitan. Baptist Churches are as far from cosmopolitan as is possible. But if one lives in a community with a Catholic plurality one will surely encounter some ethnic and cultural diversity. Where I live, the Mexican-American immigrants seem to imitate the plurality of Polish-American Catholics who were there first at the least in educational and vocational achievement. They could have hardly picked a better model.  

The last Democratic nominee to win all but two of the states (the exceptions were Oklahoma and Virginia, both of which he barely lost) with large swaths of red was Jimmy Carter.

... this map can show that Missouri is much  more "southern" in politics than Florida or even Texas.      

[muon2]

I'd be careful to read so much into the religion maps. If you take that logic too far then KS should vote like OH. The regions with Baptists on the religion map mostly indicate where the denomination split in the 1840s over slavery. The rural/urban and old-suburban/exurban divides are more important in a state like MO.

[jimrtex]

The area south of the border is hillier and not as densely settled.  Appanoose is 3 times as dense as Putnam.   Iowa was settled north to south tier by tier, before more of east to west settlement set in.   There was also a pattern of settlement along the Des Moines River.  You can see a density gap at maybe 15 degrees to the border E by S to W by N before it swings northward between Des Moines and Council Bluffs.

Missouri was settled mostly along the Missouri, with the best land pre-empted by slave owners.  Southern Missouri was particularly sparsely populated, but the population growth northward never reached the border.

Rural politics may also be somewhat reactionary.  In Missouri you can run against St.Louis and Kansas City.  It is pretty hard to seriously campaign "Billy Bucolic will stand up to the Cedar Rapids special interests." or "They have them nekkid cows made out of butter in Des Moines". 

Conversely, the Democratic Party in Missouri could depend on the St.Louis and Kansas City vote and let the organization atrophy elsewhere.  A Democratic party that depended on the city vote in Iowa is going to be in trouble.  The caucuses may have helped here, providing a focus that is different than a primary where it is easier to campaign via mass media.

Social Explorer - Pretty Cool

[BigSkyBob]

Unfortunately, we have a lot of the Southern and Plains culture.  We're maybe 1/3 each: 1. proper civilized Midwestern (St. Louis mostly), 2. Arkansas/Tennessee style in the southern half of the state, and 3. sort of Kansas-like (rather than Iowa-like, alas) in the north.  So the State is about 2/3's horrific, 1/3 barely tolerable.

The presumes that folks from Arkansas and Tennessee are not "proper[ly] civilized." That is just an assumption.  I would hazard to guess that most folks can walk alone at night in most of rural Arkansas and Tennessee. Can folks walk alone at night in Chicago or Saint Louis? Most folks I know would consider roving gangs murdering each other by the hundreds a sign of barbarity, if not anarchy, rather than "proper civilization."

[Horus]

Unfortunately, we have a lot of the Southern and Plains culture.  We're maybe 1/3 each: 1. proper civilized Midwestern (St. Louis mostly), 2. Arkansas/Tennessee style in the southern half of the state, and 3. sort of Kansas-like (rather than Iowa-like, alas) in the north.  So the State is about 2/3's horrific, 1/3 barely tolerable.

The presumes that folks from Arkansas and Tennessee are not "proper[ly] civilized." That is just an assumption.  I would hazard to guess that most folks can walk alone at night in most of rural Arkansas and Tennessee. Can folks walk alone at night in Chicago or Saint Louis? Most folks I know would consider roving gangs murdering each other by the hundreds a sign of barbarity, if not anarchy, rather than "proper civilization."

I've walked alone at night in Chicago. Not only did I feel fine, I had a good time! Try it some day.

[pbrower2a]

Unfortunately, we have a lot of the Southern and Plains culture.  We're maybe 1/3 each: 1. proper civilized Midwestern (St. Louis mostly), 2. Arkansas/Tennessee style in the southern half of the state, and 3. sort of Kansas-like (rather than Iowa-like, alas) in the north.  So the State is about 2/3's horrific, 1/3 barely tolerable.

The presumes that folks from Arkansas and Tennessee are not "proper[ly] civilized." That is just an assumption.  I would hazard to guess that most folks can walk alone at night in most of rural Arkansas and Tennessee. Can folks walk alone at night in Chicago or Saint Louis? Most folks I know would consider roving gangs murdering each other by the hundreds a sign of barbarity, if not anarchy, rather than "proper civilization."

I wouldn't try it as a stranger. I've been in Chicago (the Loop and the area around Wrigley Field) by day... if you know what you are doing in the high-rent district of a giant city (even Atlanta) you might be OK.

Southern small towns are more dangerous than they look. Of course much of it is family violence, and in view of the demographics one's home could be very dangerous.  I'd be scared to work in a convenience store anywhere, especially at night.

[Indy Texas]

My grandmother grew up in Missouri's bootheel (the area between AR and TN) and her general recollections of her childhood and family traditions seemed to be more Appalachian than Southern or Midwestern (her father playing the banjo and favoring bluegrass music; her parents being generally tolerant of/not hostile to black people, being Republicans and being Mainline Protestants rather than Evangelical ones).

Missouri definitely seems to be veering back toward its "slave state" roots as of late. I think part of that is the decline of St. Louis and Kansas City and the relative gains in influence of rural and suburban areas as a result.

[Indy Texas]

I'd be careful to read so much into the religion maps. If you take that logic too far then KS should vote like OH. The regions with Baptists on the religion map mostly indicate where the denomination split in the 1840s over slavery. The rural/urban and old-suburban/exurban divides are more important in a state like MO.

I would imagine that most of the people who described themselves as "Baptist" in that survey were members of a Southern Baptist Convention-affiliated congregation. The only part of the country with a significant "Northern" Baptist adherence at this point is in Kentucky, West Virginia and southern Ohio.

[barfbag]

midwest

[minionofmidas]

Nowhere, and therefore the Show Me State should be shown the door.