It has much, much more in common with western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee than with the rest of the state of Georgia. I live there, and I know.

Probably Northern NY, VT, and NH as well (discounting the tourism towns/cities). Certinly have more in common than with the rest of the NE block.

Today it is considered "Boston North".
This New England, for sure.

I live in the 2nd.

Well, to get to northern Maine you have to go through New England.

But that's not the point of the post!

I am sorta living in 2 area's - South of Boston and North of Waterville....talk about 2 different worlds!

Did Trump give it back to Russia?

And Hawaii?
He gave it to North Korea?

Kinda gives people an idea of where we are at I think....
m

that the midwest generally refers to places like Ohio, Indiana, Nebraska when in my book it should be what the map is calling Deseret (Utah-ish). And speaking of Deseret, all of southern Idaho should be included as well.

Great map though. I like it.

Nowhere near Deseret (Utah-ish).

Places commonly referred to as the midwest should be the Deseret area and not that area between say Kansas and Pennsylvania which seems to be convention for some reason.

Isn't that on the western side of the Rockies?

Midwest? I don't see it.

Ohio State University: usually referred to as a midwest school
Indiana: most folks say that's in the midwest.

That's my point; to be in the midwest, convention notwithstanding, they would be in Utah or Nevada. Somewhere in the middle part of the Western United States.

So, the middle part of the Eastern United States, would be ?

yep

And the lands west of the Mississippi became "The West."

The term Midwestern has been in use since the 1880s to refer to portions of the central United States. A variant term, Middle West, has been used since the 19th century and remains relatively common.[6][7] Another term sometimes applied to the same general region is the heartland.[8] Other designations for the region have fallen out of use, such as the Northwest or Old Northwest (from "Northwest Territory&quot and Mid-America. The Northwest Territory (1787) was one of the earliest territories of the United States, stretching northwest from the Ohio River to northern Minnesota and the upper-Mississippi. The upper-Mississippi watershed including the Missouri and Illinois Rivers was the setting for the earlier French settlements of the Illinois Country[9] and the Ohio Country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwestern_United_States#Background

<SNIP>

Definition

Traditional definitions of the Midwest include the Northwest Ordinance Old Northwest states and many states that were part of the Louisiana Purchase. The states of the Old Northwest are also known as Great Lakes states and are east-north central in the United States. The Ohio River runs along the southeastern section while the Mississippi River runs north to south near the center. Many of the Louisiana Purchase states in the west-north central United States, are also known as the Great Plains states, where the Missouri River is a major waterway joining with the Mississippi. The Midwest lies north of the 36°30? parallel that the 1820 Missouri Compromise established as the dividing line between future slave and non-slave states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwestern_United_States#Definition

I acknowledged that by the first few words of my original post #6: "Damn, history and conventions aside..."

It still bugs my sense of proportion that states like Iowa or Nebraska are considered/called the midwest — which was my original point and apparently misunderstood by another poster. I guess this born and raised and proud Westerner thinks of "midwest" as a verbal taking of sorts, a spatial crime if you will, by those "not from around these here parts".

I like the OP's map. Some of those terms could be adopted. And from your posted text, "Heartland" would be a great replacement for midwest.

Of course, mine is a minor gripe, kind of like po-tay-toe or po-tah-toe. And in the big picture, my beef is certainly small potatoes in a big world faced with HUGE problems.

I live outside Tallahassee in North Florida, which is NOT "The South". My husband grew up in Panama City, Florida, the "Redneck Riviera" where the saying is "You have to go north to get to the Deep South."

While both towns are very different, they are not the culture of the Deep South. On average people are better educated and in Tallahassee we a much bluer population, despite the Republicans the rest of the state send up here. Panama City is redder than Tallahassee, but still bluer than most of the stereotypical South.

Frankly I am getting tired of seeing maps that purport to define but actually divide our country. Democrats should be trying to pull our people back together, not having discussion about how to chop them up into new countries.

I'll admit I lump all of Florida together and Florida with all of the "Southeast".

That's an interesting place to put it.

There may be majorities Appalachian in a number of counties that used to have auto and auto related plants.

A real California region.

Tikki