Seattle vs. Portland

[Frodo]

I would go for Portland -they have a functioning mass transit system (i.e. light-rail), and it's a bit more affordable to live in. 

[Alcon]

Well, if you're living in-city, the bus system is pretty much good in both...are we judging metros, or cities?

Both are good for different reasons and people.

[merseysider]

Am I right in thinking that Portland is a bit more liberal than Seattle?

Personally I'd go for Seattle, I spent a few days there a couple of years ago and really liked the atmosphere and the geographical surroundings.

[Reignman]

Seattle, by a lot.

Seattle and Portland are roughly equally liberal, but if I had to choose, I would say Seattle is more liberal.

[Alcon]

Am I right in thinking that Portland is a bit more liberal than Seattle?

Economically, probably.  Socially, not really.  Seattle is generally more Democratic too.

Seattle is marginally wealthier, and marginally more liberal.  Portland was 76% Kerry*; Seattle was 80%.  Both are pretty similar, though, politically and culturally.  Portland has more working-class whites, marginally again, any whites in general.  It manages the feat of being even whiter than Seattle for a major American city.

* - Does not include small portions going into other counties, possibly.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Seattle

[Colin]

Portland

[© tweed]

I've always imagined Seattle as a place where white people in their mid-20s gathered together cozily in coffee shops and discussed how Bush stole 2004.

[Frodo]

So why is everyone going for Seattle over Portland? 

[Rin-chan]

Seattle, because it's a city and I have family near there.

Portland is barely a city, it's so tiny!  And the towns I drove by near there were falling apart and stuff.  So, no, not there.

However, the people I saw on American Idol last week from Seattle were kinda disturbing... 

Rin-chan

[Alcon]

So why is everyone going for Seattle over Portland? 

There isn't a huge difference.

Seattle population change, 2000-2005: +1.9%
Portland population change, 2000-2005: +0.5%

Not a huge difference, although Portland does have more generous incorporation boundaries (I believe it touches some less-than-dense-urban unincorporated areas, which Seattle doesn't).

Portland is more affordable, though, but a lot of people don't realize that Portland is a pretty vibrant city itself (the suburbs, I'm sad to say, mostly suck).

[Frodo]

So why is everyone going for Seattle over Portland? 

There isn't a huge difference.

Seattle population change, 2000-2005: +1.9%
Portland population change, 2000-2005: +0.5%

Not a huge difference, although Portland does have more generous incorporation boundaries (I believe it touches some less-than-dense-urban unincorporated areas, which Seattle doesn't).

Portland is more affordable, though, but a lot of people don't realize that Portland is a pretty vibrant city itself (the suburbs, I'm sad to say, mostly suck).

Really?  In what way? 

[they don't love you like i love you]

So why is everyone going for Seattle over Portland? 

There isn't a huge difference.

Seattle population change, 2000-2005: +1.9%
Portland population change, 2000-2005: +0.5%

Not a huge difference, although Portland does have more generous incorporation boundaries (I believe it touches some less-than-dense-urban unincorporated areas, which Seattle doesn't).

Portland is more affordable, though, but a lot of people don't realize that Portland is a pretty vibrant city itself (the suburbs, I'm sad to say, mostly suck).

Really?  In what way? 

uh, they're suburbs?

I voted for Portland though. Highest per capita rate of strip clubs in any major American city.

[HardRCafé]

Seattle is a great place apart from its politics.

[bgwah]

Seattle, obviously!

You lived in Seattle for a while, Frodo... What was wrong with it?

[opebo]

I voted Portland as it is a bit less expensive and I'll bet has less bad traffic.  However either of these is among the best of US cities (I also understand both have a thriving street scene if you know what I mean).

[Platypus]

I'd chose both over almost anywhere else in the US. Both certainly in the top 5.

That said, I love to be abkle to get away from the city easily, and to varied landscapes. I think Portland has a slight advantage there. I also like a vibrant CBD, which is about equal for the two, and nice, leafy inner city areas, which I think Seattle has the advantage on. I like rain (well, a little bit) but not snow, and both have too much of it. I know Portland's a little rainier, but I think seattle is a little snowier.

I'm a big fan of a good local music swcene, which Seattle definately has...but not a huge fan of grunge, meaning it's probably about equal. Good job prospects, schools and universities are important but not critical, and frequent major sporting events are a plus.

Basically, Seattle meets my criteria a little better than Portland, but there's one crucial thing: I do love a 'second city' atmosphere. Less hustle more bustle.

I voted Portland.

[Alcon]

Really?  In what way? 

With the exception of maybe Beaverton, they're mostly non self-sustaining.  That is, for any restaurants, non-outlet mall shopping, etc., you have to go into Portland.  On the other hand, Bellevue, Redmond, etc., have their own downtowns complete with skyscrapers and the like, as well as entertainment and everything.

That's a big generalization, and I haven't been to many Portland suburbs, but I get the impression that they are more exurb-y.

[AkSaber]

Seattle, cause I have family there and I've actually visited the place.

[12th Doctor]

Definatly Seattle... the only drawback is the huge f****** volcano that could wipe it out any second.

[ottermax]

As a citizen of an Eastside suburb of Seattle, I have a bias toward Seattle, although I do think it is a better city, at least in my opinion. Both Seattle and Portland are great cities, but I have a few reasons for Seattle being a better city.

Mainly, I like Seattle because of the geography, more hills, direct water access on both sides of the city (the sound and lake washington), the greenery (which portland does have). It's a perfect mixture of development and nature. On the other hand, Portland may be very green, but it's too flat for my taste and it doesn't have large bodies of water. (The Columbia doesn't really count even though it is a very large river)

I also think Seattle is slightly more vibrant and is more liberal as a whole. I like bigger cities, and Portland always seems "sleepier" than Seattle. Also, the metropolitan area of Seattle is much more interesting than Portland; as said before, the suburbs of Seattle have a more excited feel, and are also more liberal than in Portland.

The main downside to Seattle is the disgusting traffic (I doubt there will be a completed light rail system for most people before 2100). There are other small things about Seattle that I don't like, but I love this city greatly. It's too bad we did horrible on American Idol...

Definatly Seattle... the only drawback is the huge f****** volcano that could wipe it out any second.

Mount Rainier poses no threat to Seattle other than making it really ash-y.  The Tacoma area, where I live, is a different story.

Very true, Mt. Rainier won't do much to Seattle, even the chance of ash is rather low because winds go west to east. Although the lahars could impact Tacoma, it would only be really bad in the areas near the mountain, elsewhere, people could evacuate and damage would be slight.

I'd chose both over almost anywhere else in the US. Both certainly in the top 5.

That said, I love to be abkle to get away from the city easily, and to varied landscapes. I think Portland has a slight advantage there. I also like a vibrant CBD, which is about equal for the two, and nice, leafy inner city areas, which I think Seattle has the advantage on. I like rain (well, a little bit) but not snow, and both have too much of it. I know Portland's a little rainier, but I think seattle is a little snowier.

I'm a big fan of a good local music swcene, which Seattle definately has...but not a huge fan of grunge, meaning it's probably about equal. Good job prospects, schools and universities are important but not critical, and frequent major sporting events are a plus.

Basically, Seattle meets my criteria a little better than Portland, but there's one crucial thing: I do love a 'second city' atmosphere. Less hustle more bustle.

I voted Portland.

A few notes on Seattle:
We get rain, but not alot of it, just the most number of days with rain. It's also overcast almost always. I also always thought that Portland got more snow based on the news that I've watched, although this year was an exception.

[Frodo]

You lived in Seattle for a while, Frodo... What was wrong with it?

As a transitory college student -nothing.  As a potential permanent resident, it's a different story.  I look at the taxes, the high cost of living, and the general lack of a mass transit system, and there is much to give me pause.  I have never been to Portland, but from what I have heard, it is (at the very least) much more affordable, has a functioning top-notch light rail system, and has a more small-town atmosphere with all the advantages of a major city. 

[adam]

I have been to both, and liked neither. Both are very depressing places, as well as very expensive.

If forced to choose, I would probably take Seattle. If only because I liked the string of music that came out of there in the lste 80s-90s (Mudhoney, Green River, Soundgarden, etc..)

Portland is just boring. Then again...the worlds smallest park was a blast! [/sarcasm]