Conservatives, which of these cities would you least like to live in?

[danwxman]

Which of these liberal bastions would you least like to live in?

[phk]

Thier all going to vote SF.

[Keystone Phil]

San Francisco though Center City (downtown Philadelphia) is almost just as liberal.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

San Francisco hands down I love LA and have lived in New York and the others arent too bad and some are good

[Alcon]

This is very interesting...

I'd vote Washington, D.C. It has high crime, and overall I did not like it that much.

San Francisco is actually a pretty cool city, even if its politics were conervative.

[zachman]

You forgot Burlington Vermont. On politics and lifestyle alone that's where I would like to live.

[Dave from Michigan]

San Francisco

[muon2]

I find the question somewhat meaningless. From a political perspective it is unlikely that a Republican will have much if any direct impact in these cities, though Republicans can still get elected in Chicago today. the political leanings of my neighbors has never been a factor in my choice of location.

Given that political reality, I would need to look at a variety of other factors. The neighborhood was specified in some of the cities, but not all - that would make a big difference. I don't feel any need to be like Jane Byrne, moving into the Cabrini-Green housing just to make a statement. In the end I would rank the choices based on factors like neighborhood, schools, transportation, distance to work, etc. I don't see politics coming into play.

[Lunar]

SF is a cool city even if you disagree with its politics.

[danwxman]

SF is a cool city even if you disagree with its politics.

They are all cool. Cool=liberal? hehe

[Lunar]

SF is a cool city even if you disagree with its politics.

They are all cool. Cool=liberal? hehe

Not necessarily.  In terms of style, San Francisco is pretty unique in the world, while I wouldn't say the same thing about LA or many of the others.

[danwxman]

SF is a cool city even if you disagree with its politics.

They are all cool. Cool=liberal? hehe

Not necessarily.  In terms of style, San Francisco is pretty unique in the world, while I wouldn't say the same thing about LA or many of the others.

I disagree. They are all pretty unique -- but if anything San Francisco is one of the more "worldly" cities of the bunch.

[M]

Frisco. I DO live in Boston, but I survive somehow.

[12th Doctor]

San Francisco.  It is the only one of those cities that I acctually wouldn't want to live in.

Correction, I wouldn't want to live in LA either.  Acttually I change my mind, I would least like to live in LA.

[J. J.]

I really don't like CA in general, even Republican San Diego.

My guess would be San Francisco, but I wouldn't be crazy about LA either.

[dazzleman]

I would least like to live in Los Angeles, but it has nothing to do with politics.  I just don't find it a very inviting place to live.

I've never visited Chicago for more than a few hours, but I'm sure I could find a place there that I would like to live.  San Francisco is a great city, as is Seattle.  Parts of Boston, New York and Philadelphia are also very nice.

It depends a lot on neighborhood, and I am not too concerned about how people vote, unless they take their liberalism to such an extreme degree that they welcome crime, as some people on the upper west side of New York do.

I agree with muon2; politics doesn't enter the decision to any great degree.

[phk]

Los Angeles is probably the most Republican-friendly big city.

[WiseGuy]

I voted DC.  All of the others are pretty nice, politics aside, from what I've heard.  I visited Boston once when my dad ran the marathon.  The local people were pretty nice; they all wished him good luck, anyway.  DC doesn't have any appeal whatsoever, high crime, guns are illegal, and it's extremely liberal.  But this, of course, I could stand if I was ever elected to high office

[angus]

Which of these liberal bastions would you least like to live in?

I lived in Boston (well, about 4 miles north of Boston, but I worked in Boston) for about five years.  I liked it very much, and so does my wife.  I have never lived in NYC but I've enjoyed each of my visits there very much.  Unfortunately my wife detests the city.  I also enjoyed living near San Francisco very much.  Again, my wife does not like SF.  I've only been to LA twice, but had fun there too.  But the traffic was a bitch.  I'm somewhat less familiar with the others.  Overall, given those choices, I vote for Chicago, but I imagine Philly comes in a close second.  Then again, I've only briefly visited those fine cities and may not have an accurate basis for the decision.  Still, I cannot imagine basing where I'd want to live on how my neighbors vote.  That seems very silly.  And I can't imagine any grown-up, gainfully employed college graduate with any semblance of a real life would base such a decision on such a triviality either.  The folks I know base such decisions on climate, landscape, diversions, and educational and economic opportunity.  I know there's been much written in major dailies lately in an effort to push this idea that we should choose locales based on how our neighbors vote.  One may hope that their efforts are a failure.  Based on my conversations with mature intelligent individuals regarding these attempts, I believe that it will be. 

[Cashcow]

Why isn't Detroit up there?

[angus]

I'm feeling a bit feisty at the moment, so I'll say it:  racism.  No one wants to go near Detroit, and everyone knows it.  And it ain't about dems and republicans, authoritarians and anarchists, plutocrats and socialists, etc., etc..  It's about giving a bunch of lily-white posters a chance to say which city they wouldn't want to live in.  Granted, I still think the basic premise of the question is misled, but the fact that our nation's largest concentration of negroid humans (or is it a Muslim thing???!  either way... it reeks of elitism) isn't up there attests to the ethnocentric nature of every question we ask.  not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's a consideration.  I suspect you already know this, coming from delaware and all.  Suppose it were, what would be your choice then?

[Cashcow]

1. I live in New Jersey
2. I'm not a liberal or a conservative, so I won't vote
3. I grew up right outside Detroit and have been to the city hundreds of times, including earlier today

[patrick1]

Nothing politcal about it but I wouldn't want to live in D.C..  Too freaking hot, humid and full of lawyers.
I've never been to L.A. but I don't like the stereotypical version of the Los Angelino-.  I hate the fact that you would pretty much have to drive everywhere and I don't care for people who are full of $hit.

[angus]

ouch.  though I often carry a dagger in my left hand while penning with my right, I certainly meant no offense in this post.  To clarify, I was only suggesting that the omission (albeit probably inadvertent) was telling.  I just figured you were on to something with the Detroit comment.  e.g., the hypocrisy of the so=called "Left" and all.  (vis-a-vis Reverend Sharpton) 

On another (and probably more important) note, neither are most of the rest of us, so vote in this poll.  It's fun, and gives us insight into the collective insight of our forum.  And watch "Reflections of Evil" (a great film by Damon Packard)  Yeah, I'm still pushing that, a year after Elvis' 69th birthday, when I joined this forum.

[Cashcow]

I wasn't taking offense, just informing you of my experience with the city. And you are correct - I brought up Detroit because it's very well-known that nobody would want to live there, including hardcore liberals who will always recieve the city's vote (except BRTD, but he's cool and all). Of course, a lot of right-wingers are even more afraid of it, which bothers me, because some parts are quite nice and worth seeing.

I would vote Los Angeles.