Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 1675514" data-attributes="member: 10201">Huh? While the exact boundaries of "the Midwest" are up for debate, it's pretty well agreed that everything west of the Ohio River and east of the Plains qualifies, with usually only those states north of, roughly, the Mason-Dixon being included. Ohio might or might not be "Midwest", but IN, IL, MI, WI, MN, IA definitely are (and some others--like i said, it's less definite as you get near other regions, as in all things without definite boundaries). [Interesting thing i've noticed: nobody wants OH. Those from states west of it refer to it as "back East", while those from states east of it refer to it as "Midwest".  The same thing doesn't seem to happen to any other state, AFAIK--at least some of the adjoining states will admit to being in the same region.] Yeah, what he said. More or less. Apparently whoever that was was thinking in terms of the overall geography of the US, rather than the established regional labels. It's true, Chicago is less than a third of the way from E to W, which by all rights "should" be the "mid-continent" or perhaps even "near east" or somesuch. But, due to historical precedent, it is, and for as long as it's been there, pretty much, has been, the Midwest (only, maybe, when WI/MI/IA was "the West" might it, too, have been considered "out West".).  And please don't confuse the Midwest and the Plains States.</blockquote>