OT: Michigan (the state) more popular than Ohio
I wonder what the IL fav/unfavs were prior to 2008
I'm surprised that New Jersey isn't last. Also: if you removed LA from California, I bet its at least mid-pack.
It gives me hope that America might actually realize that New Jersey is comprised of a lot more than the (admittedly) terrible 2% of the state that is shown on MTV/Bravo.
I was born and raised in new jersey and lived in pa for a year and pa (where I lived) was brutal. New jersey has alot of run down areas but it's got alot of nice parts and there is tons to do where I live atleast. For the record people in new jersey hate the jersey shore show
coach hoke should make a sign out of this.... take that urban
I can tell you from a Pennsylvania point of view I hate Ohio and NJ the most. Imagine being lumped between those 2 states....
Don't forget gorgeous West Virginia to the south, with beautiful and warm Lake Erie to the north, plus all those exciting population centers in mid-upstate New York!
West Virginia's scenery is actually very pretty. I went on a rafting trip there a couple years ago.
How is California the most disliked? I mean, I understand that the state had money trouble, LA sucks, and it may drop off the continent at any point in time, but California does have some very nice places.
Plus, it's not Ohio.
Yeah, that's interesting. I've never been one to rave about CA, but it certainly has a lot of redeeming qualities. It has an ocean with great beaches, beautiful mountains, tons of sunshine and some of the best schools in the country. Not to mention the best wine in the Western Hemisphere. And even if you don't like LA, San Diego and San Francisco are two of the coolest cities in the country, both for totally different reasons.
People in a lot of Western states hate Californians for moving to their states and making them more crowded and expensive - more like California itself.
Thats a good point though, but it calls into question what the poll really asks. Does America dislike California, or Californians, because there's a huge difference. Easily the worst part about CA is the people who are from there, but one of the great things about CA is that so many people who live here aren't from here.
Californians, by and large, are terrible people. The state, however, is gorgeous.
I've lived all over the place (urban, rural, US, abroad) but I'm from the East Coast originally. I lived in Santa Cruz and San Francisco for a few years not too long ago and found the people from there to be lovely and really, really fun. The folks I didn't like were the gazillion hipster transplants in the Bay Area. Los Angeles is a different story, I'd never want to live there or the Central Valley, but I'd argue that the people actually from there are nice enough. They're definitely not terrible people overall, IMHO.
Santa Cruz might be the most laid back place on the planet, and is certainly not indicative of the state as a whole. And I suppose I was speaking more of Southern Californians than people from the Bay Area. Born and raised Angelenos are terrible. The transplants in SoCal are mostly Midwesterners looking for jobs or sunshine.
Most of the Angelenos I know are people who left to move to the Midwest or Bay Area, so probably not representative of the majority.
Dude, now I miss California. Don't get me started on Jersey though.
And I guess most of the Angelenos I know are the ones who didn't leave, and most of them think Los Angeles is the only city on earth worth living in.
So I should specify - Angelenos in Los Angeles are terrible.
EDIT: Additionally, a good chunk of the bad apples here are the kids who come to LA to "make it" and they usually think their shit doesn't stink for about 5 years until they're just 28 year old cocktail waitresses, and the kids who are total douches in whatever state they live in and move to LA to become super douche. That happens a lot.
I am very surprised by this as well. Have people really forgotten everything the Beach Boys taught us?
water is wet and the sky is blue.
So this is what you'd consider Recruitapalooza fallout posts. God bless the next 6 months on this blog!
How is it that Deleware got a 0% favorable and 0% unfavorable?
Clearly no one can bring themselves to have any kind of opinion about Delaware.
I don't think anyone has been there.
The only time I'm in Delaware is on the train to NYC. I have yet to actually stop in that place.
My wife firmly argues that the existance of Delaware is a fiction. My counter-argument that I have actually been there does not dissuade her.
There's a reason why so many astronauts have been from Ohio. They're trying to get as far as away as possible...
I'm a Michigan fan who lives in Ohio. As bad as some think osu fans are, I would still rather live in Ohio than Michigan. While Ohio is no tropical paradise, Michigan is just too cold and gets too much snow for me. But, as always, Go Blue.
OT, but Huge just said why doesn't Ohio pay tribute to Woody Hayes by scheduling Clemson and punching a guy on the sidelines.
I am genuinely baffled by Illinois and California being the two least favorable states in the nation. As an Illinoisian who loves to visit California, I would like to know why so many Americans have a beef with two great places.
"Hate" is a strong word, but I definitely don't enjoy driving in Illinois. It seems like the entire driving experience in that state is either 1) being gridlocked in horrendous traffic (and paying tolls constantly) or 2) 500 miles of flat cornfields.
See, I would get that if they told people to take into account the entire state of Illinois, but as stated below, most people equate Chicago with Illinois. So as a person from the Chicago area, I don't really get it. Traffic isn't really that much worse for a massive metropolitan region and the terrain isn't too different than most other Midwest states.
I'm thinking the unfavorability comes from some political things that are not kosher for the board.
Traffic is definitely worse in the Chicago area than anywhere else in the Midwest. It's bad enough that a lot of people headed that direction will go out of their way to plan alternate routes to avoid the gridlock. I know people who, coming from the Lower Peninsula to Wisconsin, will actually drive the long way (through the U.P.) to avoid the Chicago traffic.
It may be that for a metropolitan area of 9-10 million people, that level of congestion is normal, but for a Michigander it's the only city of that size within reasonable driving distance, so we don't have a point of comparison. If I'm going to NYC, I won't take the car - I'll fly and use public transportation when I'm there.
For most people Illinois = Chicago. While Chicago has some great things about it, driving there is awful. Chicago also has a reputation for political corruption. Regardless of whether or not that reputation is warranted, that is probably the perception among many people.
Why is traffic such a major factor to so many people? LA has bad traffic, Chicago has bad traffic, NYC has bad traffic - most major cities have bad traffic, it's a product of being where a lot of other people also are.
Chicago is one of the coolest cities in the country, and I've never not wanted to go there because of traffic. In fact, I would have voted for Illinois (because of Chicago) as the most favorable state in the Midwest.
Traffic is an issue party because it does affect the quality of life (i.e. extended commutes leave less time with family, friends, etc.). When I lived in San Diego there were a lot of things to do there, but there were plenty of times when we decided to scrap our plans to do something because we knew that traffic would be too much of a hassle.
Also, I personally had a lof of experiences with Chicago traffic when I lived in Milwaukee and had family in Michigan. Because I was going through Chicago and not visiting, the traffic was my primary concern. The Chicago highways always seem to be undergoing major construction but never seem to make much progress.
That being said, I agree that Chicago is not alone in having traffic problems. Like you said, many of the largest cities do have issues with traffic. I just have more experience driving in Chicago than in NY, and it always made me crazy.
My question wasn't "is traffic a bad thing" because I think we'll all agree that traffic sucks. But the point I was trying to make was that every big city worth living in or going to has bad traffic. You use San Diego as an example of bad traffic, but my wife and I like to go to San Diego because the traffic there is so light.
If you're not a big city person, that's fine. Then it's a lot more than traffic. But when judging big cities against each other, saying "but they have bad traffic" is like comparing skyscapers against each other and saying "but I don't like elevators."
I lived there for 3 years and I can tell you there are certain routes (very popular ones, obviously) where the traffic is worse than it is in LA. There are routes where there is surprisingly little traffic, but there are some that are just a total nightmare. It all depends on where you are staying and where you are going.
That said, it doesn't come close to Chicago. I did three years there and that is the worst traffic I have ever experienced, easily worse than LA and the Bay Area, two other places I've lived and are notorious for bad traffic.
Not that I can trust anyone who would willfully move away from San Diego, but there's no way Chicago traffic is worse than LA. I've lived in LA for a while and been to Chicago many, many times. Even my buddies from Chicago complain about LA traffic when they come here.
I'm from Canton, MI and I love the Chicago experience. Why so many haters?
Once you actually move to Cali, you will understand a little better why it is disliked.
For me growing up over on the west side of Michigan on the farm, this place is about the most backwards place I have ever seen, and i have been out here for a couple of years now!
Probably has a lot to do with everything being expensive, everyone being somewhat fake, and having to deal with a lot of commuter/traffic issues that you wouldn't normally see.
Just the other day it took me three hours to get from LAX to Pasadena, which is only about 25 miles or so away. Very frustrating.
You should always fly out of Burbank, that's what I do. It's crazy when I fly from LA to Grand Rapids, and GRR is the busier airport.
True, but it generally tends to be more expensive to fly BUR to GRR than it does to fly from LAX to say MDW or ORD. I end up getting sent on work stuff last minute, so that is why i end up there a lot more often.
Not at all saying I hate living here, just a change that takes some time to get used to i guess.
Yeah, it's a bit more expensive, but time is money, and if your company is paying for it, who cares?
That said, Pasadena is about the worst place to live in LA as far as getting to LAX is concerned.
EDIT: If you're going to Midway, Burbank is perfect because you can fly Southwest, which is what I fly almost exclusively. I would recommend checking that out, it will probably even save you money.
I completely agree for personal travel, and believe me I always go that route first.
However, there are sadly not too many flights out of Burbank that go to the UK, which was the case not the other day. That is the curse of having to go on last minute overseas trips!
San Diego was fun for a while, but the traffic kept getting worse and the cost of living kept going up. I used to ride my bike about 12 miles each way to work and back when I lived there, and I would usually get there faster than if I had driven my car.
When it was time to start a family I returned to the Midwest for a bit before finally settling here in Boise and we are loving it here.
I lived there for 3 years and was happy to leave and never plan on moving back. Though I also got sick of the weather, which most people have a hard time understanding.
Nice to see my home state of Idaho coming in at a +19. I am not surprised that 58% of people are "not sure" of their opinion of Idaho (only Nebraska and West Virginia had a higher percentage), but I was wondering who are the 11% with negative associations. Oregon fans, I presume.
You could also state the results as indicating that Michigan was in the top half of the results and Ohio was in the bottom half.
I suspect the high unfavorable rating for Illinois has much to do with exposure to FIPs. That's an unfortunate acronym for the entire state, considering that it only refers to people from Chicago and (especially) the burbs.
I always loved New Hampshire's motto: 'Like free or die'. Low taxes, beautiful coastline near Portsmouth.
Not surprised that Maryland is in the lower 3rd...should be a bit lower. 'Live free on others' dime' should be the state motto.
I'm a bit puzzled why California is so low too...but I pretty much stay west of the 405 when we go out there, and only venture east to Beverly Hills or K-Town.
Indiana with a +19 is pretty nice to see since I live here. Good to see Indiana and Michigan ranked higher than Ohio. I am surprised about Illinois being so low like many of you have mentioned. I have family that live in the Chicago suburbs and I absolutely love visting there. Chicago is such a cool city and has a bunch of awesome stuff there. Also, California being the worst state is a joke. If this is really based on traffic problems then that is stupid. California has a bunch of great stuff too. Figured states that had no tourist attractions would be the worst states.