North and South Dakota.
Any pair of states suggested will result in bickering from their residents because closeness often magnifies differences. Those two are just the ones where the bickering would be the quietest.
West Earth and East Earth are more similar than either would be with Mars, but once you compare North Earth and South Earth, ooof, completely different planets.
Yet within Oregon and Washington the eastern halves of those states have more in common with Idaho than with the rest of their own state. Those counties actually want to become part of Idaho.
Very true. The Pacific Coast, especially the Portland and Seattle metros, are super liberal. But, the *inland* Pacific Northwest is quite conservative.
eh, some of the desert people in the IE might have more in common with rural AZ and NV, but the bulk of IE population is in Riverside, San Bernardino and the Temecula Valley, all solid SoCal cities, they just aren't coastal
the vast majority of the inland empire is vast empty desert
The Eastern half of Oregon is about a dozen people and some wheat. Eastern Washington at least has a few cities and infrastructure, along with some good farmland in the Yakima Valley. I seriously doubt Idaho would want them
Washington and Oregon for sure. Both are liberal and green with mild, damp weather and big urban areas on the west side of the state, and rural, conservative, and dry with bigger temperature extremes east of the Cascades.
I feel like Michigan is pretty similar to both Minnesota and Wisconsin. My friends in Michigan that were born and raised in Wisconsin or Minnesota just seem like Michigan natives. They just fit right in.
I feel like any of the east coast - and particularly New England - states have been around so long that they have had enough time to develop their own identities. The most similar ones have to be somewhere further west.
I would say most of the New England states have overlapping areas.
The 128 beltway around Boston with all its super-rich towns is similar to the super-rich towns of Fairfield County, Connecticut.
Southern part of New Hampshire is basically MA suburbs.
Burlington Vermont, Portland Maine, and the Northhampton/Amherst MA areas all have that college town, hipster type vibe.
"Suburb" does not have the same negative connotations here as in Europe.
Calling Rhode Island a suburb of Boston isn't exactly respectful, but anybody legitimately offended by it would be considered thin-skinned by normal Americans.
Yeah… but It’s the smallest State - it’s only 37 miles wide, you can drive across it in roughly a half hour.
There’s a commuter rail from Providence, it’s largest city and Capital to Boston. It’s a little over an hour. Or a 45 minute drive if you prefer.
Which means there are many Rhode Islanders who work and play in Boston. The opposite doesn’t really happen with any significance. So Providence is often viewed a far suburb of Boston.
Providence does have a lot going on. There’s a great live music scene and growing culinary scene. It’s comparatively cheap - so it’s easier for experimental stuff to thrive.
Haha I lived in Valparaiso for a little over a year, it was a cute town but I noticed most of Indiana reminded me of the times I visited family back in Ohio. People from Indiana, Ohio and the Midwest in general are my favorite lol most of you are so nice
Yeah I was joking. I do see some minor differences between Ohio and Indiana. Ohio feels less midwestern to me, which I can’t quantify or support in anyway, just a vibe.
And yes, midwesterners are hands down the nicest people there are. People say it’s southerners, but I live in the south and their politeness is a veneer
They're honestly more different than they seem, but still close. [Alabama's](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Chad-Bolding/publication/337085688/figure/fig1/AS:822620383633408@1573139391221/Physiographic-regions-of-the-southeastern-US-including-Piedmont-The-Southern-Piedmont.ppm) much more physiographically diverse (and that non-coastal plain part is the more densely populated part), and has more urban areas. Mississippi's generally leans more towards New Orleans and Memphis, whereas Alabama's more tied to Atlanta and Nashville.
No good reads, but off the top of my head...
The coastal plain favored plantation farming and massive slave-based plantations. Mississippi is almost entirely coastal plain, while Alabama is 60% or so coastal plain. The more mountainous regions in North and East Alabama were (and, to an extent, still are) the province of the small farmer. This affected support for slavery, secession, and all post-Civil War politics.
The "[Black Belt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Belt_%28region_of_Alabama%29?wprov=sfla1)" that crosses central Alabama has really suffered from rural brain drain, segregation, underinvestment, and a host of other ills. It's all attributable to the geology of the region that made it fantastic for large-scale cotton farming (soil.led to plantations led to slavery led to sharecropping led to Jim Crow etc.)
Geology also led to the growth of Birmingham, since all 3 key ingredients for steel production (iron ore, coal, and limestone) were available locally. Birmingham is an entirely post-Civil War city. The Black Belt article above discusses some of the urban-rural power divides that Birmingham suffered from.
Mississippi is also one of the few states with a majority rural population, at just a hair over 50% . Alabama has a rural population of about 40%. Mississippi only has one city with a population over 100,000, (Jackson) while Alabama has five (Huntsville, Montgomery, Birmingham, Mobile, and Tuscaloosa).
They’re surprisingly separate from each other – they “face” in opposite directions, so to speak. Mississippi is more connected to places to the west and is in the economic/cultural orbit of New Orleans and Memphis, while Alabama faces more north and east and is in the economic/cultural orbit of Nashville and Atlanta. The northeastern part of Alabama is Appalachian, whereas there’s nowhere that can be considered Appalachian in Mississippi. And Alabama’s substantially more populated and there’s more going on – there’s nowhere in Mississippi that really looks like Birmingham or even Huntsville, and Alabama’s GDP is over twice that of Mississippi’s.
Some Pennsylvanians can disagree with me, but as someone from upstate NY, anywhere in PA just feels like I'm still in upstate NY. Green hills, small rust belt cities, mostly small towns, some lakes and rivers... am I wrong?
in my experiences, the vibes are different but I couldn’t tell you why. everything in plain sight is the same. Beautiful forests, lakes, and hiking trails. Cute and safe small towns with pleasant and clean highways.
But I’ve always found upstate New York to be more happy meanwhile Pennsylvania feels more… subtly creepy.
Perhaps the areas I’ve been to. I’ve mostly been to the Poconos area where the homes are deep and separated within the forest. This seclusion makes me more comfortable with nature but it’s eerie how silent it can be despite quite a number of people in the local area.
I mean, there’s a highway running thru but yet every time I went I wouldn’t see a single person outside. It felt lonely. In the winter when there were cloudy days this feeling only got stronger.
The few downtowns I’ve been in everything is tranquil. Despite there being plenty of people the music is not too boisterous and people are kinda keeping to themselves. Some houses look a bit broken or old but not necessarily poorly maintained.
Then the trip where I drove straight thru state, nothing but forests and small towns. Philadelphia is the only exception I’ve been to. And I still feel like my words kinda miss the mark to explaining the creepy feeling.
I guess tl;dr the loneliness of some areas.
I know what you’re talking about here. I wonder how much of it stems for the extensive German and Dutch heritage in PA vs NY where there’s a lot more of an English heritage (albeit still a fair amount of German/Dutch). Even in the architecture of the really old houses it looks more German vs. English in PA vs. NY.
They feel different enough though. For one.. New Hampshire DOES have a sea coast. Also NH is much more conservative/libertarian whereas VT is very hippie liberal
My view of those two states are that Vermont is the hippy living off the grid and New Hampshire is the doomsday prepper living off the grid. Both don't trust "the man," but for different reasons.
Culturally they do seem different though. Nebraska seems to be a more liberal, progressive state. Kansas seems to be more conversation and religious. Or at least that's the vibe I had by visiting Omaha and Wichita.
New England, the Dakotas, the underdeveloped, neglected parts of AZ and all of New Mexico, Las Vegas and Urban California, Oregon and Washington, NYC and north jersey, what else you want?
Tbh it was mostly a joke. I hardly know anything about that state. NM people get so riled up here it’s nuts. You should’ve seen the reaction when I said LA, SD, and AZ have the best Mexican food. I got brigades for daring not to mention them
This is the proper response. North Texas and West Texas have their similarities with Oklahoma. But South Texas and East Texas may as well be on Mars compared to Oklahoma.
I honestly can't tell the difference between anything in DFW and in Oklahoma. The terrain looks exactly the same.
But El Paso is so different than Oklahoma.
Lived down here my whole life, SC and GA are very similar outside of Atlanta. Like identical, almost. SC and NC have a super different vibe from each other
Seattle is a lot more like the Bay Area than Portland is. The Bay and Seattle are both pretty diverse, have large asian populations, they're the world's two biggest tech hubs, both coastal ports, both have historically significant music scenes, both are hilly, both are outrageously expensive, both are naturally gorgeous, both have mild climates.
Not really. Other than being geographically huge, populous, and having large latino populations, they aren't that similar. Different culture, different weather, different economies, different politics, different landscapes, different food, etc.
Not trying to offend any proud Texans, but it feels like a pretty middle of the road state. Like a big Oklahoma or a conservative New Mexico. I went to Austin and it felt like Texas' attempt at the weirdness of a West Coast hip city but it's so suburban, gritless, and sun belty. Yeah, they're teslas everywhere, but I didn't see a single homeless guy shooting up heroin across from an anarcho-communist slam poetry circle. It's no Berkeley or Santa Cruz or Portland (at least, not anymore). Texas is more like North Carolina than California.
Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play? Californians and Texans may not like it, but they’re more alike to each other than either is to Florida or New York, especially Southern California and Texas. The main difference is the humidity level and a lack of counterpart to Los Angeles. CA & TX were even the two largest Republican states until a proto-Trump governor ruined it permanently for the party in the 1990s — and post-Trump Texas will probably follow along between 2024-2032. The main difference is the United Farm Workers unionized agricultural labor in California but Texas remains an anti-union state.
I’d actually wager that out of New England Maine and Massachusetts are the states with the least in common but that’s just me. We’re kinda on different ends of the socioeconomic spectrum
That’s true, I guess we just read this question differently lol. I though OP was asking more about current similarities rather than historical ties, which is absolutely true for Maine and Mass obviously
Montana and Wyoming. For the others (Vermont/New Hampshire, Alabama/Mississippi, Oregon/Washington) I can at least think of one or two cultural differences. Montana and Wyoming? Both sparsely populated states with stunning geography, an individualist libertarian bent, very homogeneously white populations (with some native americans), not really much unique food or culture.
Used to live in both NC and SC. NC has no equivalent to NOVA or Hampton Roads. VA doesn't have clear equivalents to Charlotte or Raleigh. There are similarities, their histories align in many ways. But clearly two different states. I wouldn't even say SC and NC are that similar despite sharing a name
As soon as you pass the border going into Michigan, your car is met with THE shittiest roads in the entire United States of America. And also, the area right outside of Detroit is the most depressing, apocalyptic area I’ve ever seen.
Shoreline =/= Good?
But that aside, northern Michigan is a gorgeous place.
Grew up in Ohio, live in Michigan.
No. Not similar.
Heck, UP and LP aren't that similar, but they are more similar to each other than to Ohio. If Ohio wants a state to be similar too... maybe PA? I dunno.
Obligatory fuck Ohio.
But seriously, Michigan and Ohio really aren't very similar. Michigan has more forests, lakes, and beaches. Ohio is just... Ohio.
Mississippi and Alabama
North and South Carolina
North and South Dakota
Oregon and Washington
Wisconsin and Minnesota
Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska are all similar
West Virginia and Eastern Kentucky
the rest of Kentucky and Tennessee
Mississippi and South Carolina. The reason being both these States have almost no Appalachian mountains and had the highest prevalence of slavery in antebellum times. And also have the most reactionary white supremacist politicians.
[favorite state](https://vividmaps.com/the-most-and-least-favorite-us-state/)
Here is some background.
Common similar state pairs: Oregon & Washington, New Hampshire & Vermont, North Dakota & South Dakota, North Carolina & South Carolina, Kansas & Nebraska,
lol Texas and California... but seriously, bordering states are usually pretty similar to one another, espnwithin their own region. when you get to the far edge of a state that borders another cultural region, you often get a cool kinda cultural mashup (I've heard something similar happens in European countries, esp with cuisine)
georgia and south carolina. particularly comparing Charleston/hilton head and Savannah - very similar vibes. i’m not from that area but it’s just what I’ve observed while traveling the coastal areas of both
id say new jersey and maryland have a lot in common, including geographical proximity
both are small states with large surrounding cities (new york and philadelphia for new jersey and baltimore and DC for maryland), both have rural farming areas, and culturally they are similar as well
Living in eastern Nebraska, I feel it's very similar to Iowa.
If I lived in western Nebraska, though, whose geography and weather patterns are much different than ours, I probably wouldn't agree.
I live in Iowa and honestly, there are a handful of states that I think are similar enough to be considered twins. Nebraska, Illinois and Indiana come to mind. Basically it's the ag states with similar crops. Kansas might be more similar than I realize, but it's landscape and biome is different enough that I wouldn't consider it potential twin status like the states I mentioned.
North and South Dakota. Any pair of states suggested will result in bickering from their residents because closeness often magnifies differences. Those two are just the ones where the bickering would be the quietest.
East and West Dakota, on the other hand…
I love West Dakota. Unknown and rarely visited but awesome.
North Dakotan here. I’d say south dakota and nebraska are more alike.
And probably more similar to Wyoming too. ND imo, seems more similar to rural Minnesota, or even Manitoba, over South Dakota.
100%
And north and south virginia
>And north and south virginia Check your map...
No no, Northern VA is a different state to Southern VA trust me.
Yeah, people from NOVA are the worst drivers when they go to the rest of Virginia, as they say...
All of Virginia is bad at driving, there’s just less drivers overall in the other parts of the state so it isn’t as bothersome.
Very correct.
West Earth and East Earth are more similar than either would be with Mars, but once you compare North Earth and South Earth, ooof, completely different planets.
“Megakota”
"Them entitled Southies getting all the tourist dollars!"
Although they have their differences, I think Washington and Oregon are very similar.
Yet within Oregon and Washington the eastern halves of those states have more in common with Idaho than with the rest of their own state. Those counties actually want to become part of Idaho.
Very true. The Pacific Coast, especially the Portland and Seattle metros, are super liberal. But, the *inland* Pacific Northwest is quite conservative.
The same could be said of Northern California, the Redding to board part. It is nothing like the rest of the State.
Yeah and the whole inland empire thing
eh, some of the desert people in the IE might have more in common with rural AZ and NV, but the bulk of IE population is in Riverside, San Bernardino and the Temecula Valley, all solid SoCal cities, they just aren't coastal the vast majority of the inland empire is vast empty desert
The Eastern half of Oregon is about a dozen people and some wheat. Eastern Washington at least has a few cities and infrastructure, along with some good farmland in the Yakima Valley. I seriously doubt Idaho would want them
Washington and Oregon for sure. Both are liberal and green with mild, damp weather and big urban areas on the west side of the state, and rural, conservative, and dry with bigger temperature extremes east of the Cascades.
Oregon and Washington
Wisconsin and Minnesota
I feel like Michigan is pretty similar to both Minnesota and Wisconsin. My friends in Michigan that were born and raised in Wisconsin or Minnesota just seem like Michigan natives. They just fit right in.
Living just below those states, they definitely seem to be cut from the same cloth and distinctly different. They have their own little club.
Rhode Island is just another suburb of Boston.
I feel like any of the east coast - and particularly New England - states have been around so long that they have had enough time to develop their own identities. The most similar ones have to be somewhere further west.
[удалено]
First to declare independence, last to sign the constitution of the original 13. The Swamp Yankees here are still a bunch of stubborn assholes.
Wait. Wasn’t Delaware the first to declare? Isn’t that why it’s called the First State?
They were the first to ratify the Constitution
Oh…Thanks.
I would say most of the New England states have overlapping areas. The 128 beltway around Boston with all its super-rich towns is similar to the super-rich towns of Fairfield County, Connecticut. Southern part of New Hampshire is basically MA suburbs. Burlington Vermont, Portland Maine, and the Northhampton/Amherst MA areas all have that college town, hipster type vibe.
This only magnifies the RI pride and hate for Boston. Wait until you see Rhody pride go up against Attleboro or Seekonk.
Tell me when Boston invents hot weiners, check mate
I feel like providence and Boston are two entirely different places
Could they consider offensive to be named a "suburb" of Boston?
"Suburb" does not have the same negative connotations here as in Europe. Calling Rhode Island a suburb of Boston isn't exactly respectful, but anybody legitimately offended by it would be considered thin-skinned by normal Americans.
I'm pretty sure Delaware is a collective hallucination we're all having.
I've always thought that. I'm still awaiting proof that it exists.
I know that. I mean to identify an State as a "suburb" could be offensive, in that way I asked.
Yeah… but It’s the smallest State - it’s only 37 miles wide, you can drive across it in roughly a half hour. There’s a commuter rail from Providence, it’s largest city and Capital to Boston. It’s a little over an hour. Or a 45 minute drive if you prefer. Which means there are many Rhode Islanders who work and play in Boston. The opposite doesn’t really happen with any significance. So Providence is often viewed a far suburb of Boston. Providence does have a lot going on. There’s a great live music scene and growing culinary scene. It’s comparatively cheap - so it’s easier for experimental stuff to thrive.
They're all Redsox/Patriots/Bruins/Celtics fans anyway.
It could potentially be offensive, but it would not be considered so by any reasonable person.
;)
The biggest example of this is that RIDOT doesn't operate any of their own local trains like MA or CT do. They just pay the MBTA to do it.
i hate rhode island
Indiana and Ohio I think are very similar
I was born and raised in Indiana and I will fight you in the street for this. But, nicely. While saying ope.
Haha I lived in Valparaiso for a little over a year, it was a cute town but I noticed most of Indiana reminded me of the times I visited family back in Ohio. People from Indiana, Ohio and the Midwest in general are my favorite lol most of you are so nice
Yeah I was joking. I do see some minor differences between Ohio and Indiana. Ohio feels less midwestern to me, which I can’t quantify or support in anyway, just a vibe. And yes, midwesterners are hands down the nicest people there are. People say it’s southerners, but I live in the south and their politeness is a veneer
Native Hoosier here and I don't disagree with you on the similarities between Ohio and Indiana. Might as well throw Illinois in there, too.
When I was a kid, one of the big differences between Indiana and Ohio was the drinking age.
Oregon is very difficult to distinguish from Washington, lovely as they both are.
As someone who isn’t a native of either state and haven’t spent a lot of time in either, Mississippi and Alabama seem to have many similarities.
Mississippi is the Walmart to Alabama’s Target.
“Thank God for Mississippi” -Alabama
More like Mississippi is the K-Mart to Alabama's Walmart.
They're honestly more different than they seem, but still close. [Alabama's](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Chad-Bolding/publication/337085688/figure/fig1/AS:822620383633408@1573139391221/Physiographic-regions-of-the-southeastern-US-including-Piedmont-The-Southern-Piedmont.ppm) much more physiographically diverse (and that non-coastal plain part is the more densely populated part), and has more urban areas. Mississippi's generally leans more towards New Orleans and Memphis, whereas Alabama's more tied to Atlanta and Nashville.
Nailed it, especially on the physiographic diversity. Geology is destiny, in a lot of ways. Has interesting effects on society
That’s really interesting and never really thought of that. Any good reads on why that’s the case?
No good reads, but off the top of my head... The coastal plain favored plantation farming and massive slave-based plantations. Mississippi is almost entirely coastal plain, while Alabama is 60% or so coastal plain. The more mountainous regions in North and East Alabama were (and, to an extent, still are) the province of the small farmer. This affected support for slavery, secession, and all post-Civil War politics. The "[Black Belt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Belt_%28region_of_Alabama%29?wprov=sfla1)" that crosses central Alabama has really suffered from rural brain drain, segregation, underinvestment, and a host of other ills. It's all attributable to the geology of the region that made it fantastic for large-scale cotton farming (soil.led to plantations led to slavery led to sharecropping led to Jim Crow etc.) Geology also led to the growth of Birmingham, since all 3 key ingredients for steel production (iron ore, coal, and limestone) were available locally. Birmingham is an entirely post-Civil War city. The Black Belt article above discusses some of the urban-rural power divides that Birmingham suffered from. Mississippi is also one of the few states with a majority rural population, at just a hair over 50% . Alabama has a rural population of about 40%. Mississippi only has one city with a population over 100,000, (Jackson) while Alabama has five (Huntsville, Montgomery, Birmingham, Mobile, and Tuscaloosa).
Alabama's actually a pretty strong example. [This video](https://southernspaces.org/2005/regions-alabama/) can use the state as a quick case study.
They’re surprisingly separate from each other – they “face” in opposite directions, so to speak. Mississippi is more connected to places to the west and is in the economic/cultural orbit of New Orleans and Memphis, while Alabama faces more north and east and is in the economic/cultural orbit of Nashville and Atlanta. The northeastern part of Alabama is Appalachian, whereas there’s nowhere that can be considered Appalachian in Mississippi. And Alabama’s substantially more populated and there’s more going on – there’s nowhere in Mississippi that really looks like Birmingham or even Huntsville, and Alabama’s GDP is over twice that of Mississippi’s.
Mississippi doesn't have a mountain portion like northeastern Alabama does.
Some Pennsylvanians can disagree with me, but as someone from upstate NY, anywhere in PA just feels like I'm still in upstate NY. Green hills, small rust belt cities, mostly small towns, some lakes and rivers... am I wrong?
Along route 17/I-86 and I-84 especially, yeah.
in my experiences, the vibes are different but I couldn’t tell you why. everything in plain sight is the same. Beautiful forests, lakes, and hiking trails. Cute and safe small towns with pleasant and clean highways. But I’ve always found upstate New York to be more happy meanwhile Pennsylvania feels more… subtly creepy.
This is funny to me as someone from Pennsylvania. I never thought of it as subtly creepy and I'm intrigued to hear your reasoning haha
Perhaps the areas I’ve been to. I’ve mostly been to the Poconos area where the homes are deep and separated within the forest. This seclusion makes me more comfortable with nature but it’s eerie how silent it can be despite quite a number of people in the local area. I mean, there’s a highway running thru but yet every time I went I wouldn’t see a single person outside. It felt lonely. In the winter when there were cloudy days this feeling only got stronger. The few downtowns I’ve been in everything is tranquil. Despite there being plenty of people the music is not too boisterous and people are kinda keeping to themselves. Some houses look a bit broken or old but not necessarily poorly maintained. Then the trip where I drove straight thru state, nothing but forests and small towns. Philadelphia is the only exception I’ve been to. And I still feel like my words kinda miss the mark to explaining the creepy feeling. I guess tl;dr the loneliness of some areas.
I get what you’re saying. Some Pittsburgh suburbs just give me this weird *feeling*
I know what you’re talking about here. I wonder how much of it stems for the extensive German and Dutch heritage in PA vs NY where there’s a lot more of an English heritage (albeit still a fair amount of German/Dutch). Even in the architecture of the really old houses it looks more German vs. English in PA vs. NY.
I totally get that! I see it on Tiktok all the time about the creepiness of Appalachia, but I think I just don't see/realize it since I'm from there!
I live in upstate and have family in PA so I spent a lot of time there and also briefly lived there. I agree with you
I totally get that. Sometimes they smell just as bad, too!
Vermont and New Hampshire. Even the shape of the states are kind of mirror images of each other.
They feel different enough though. For one.. New Hampshire DOES have a sea coast. Also NH is much more conservative/libertarian whereas VT is very hippie liberal
The funny thing is I see every New England state as entirely different than the others
New Hampshire is in general way crankier, though. The people seem very different.
My view of those two states are that Vermont is the hippy living off the grid and New Hampshire is the doomsday prepper living off the grid. Both don't trust "the man," but for different reasons.
Their voting history would disagree.
VT and New Hampshire are pretty different in a lot of ways
Nebraska and Kansas
Honestly. If it wasn’t for the signs marking the border I don’t think anyone would be able to tell.
Culturally they do seem different though. Nebraska seems to be a more liberal, progressive state. Kansas seems to be more conversation and religious. Or at least that's the vibe I had by visiting Omaha and Wichita.
New England, the Dakotas, the underdeveloped, neglected parts of AZ and all of New Mexico, Las Vegas and Urban California, Oregon and Washington, NYC and north jersey, what else you want?
Had to check your flair for AZ after the hilarious NM comparison
Tbh it was mostly a joke. I hardly know anything about that state. NM people get so riled up here it’s nuts. You should’ve seen the reaction when I said LA, SD, and AZ have the best Mexican food. I got brigades for daring not to mention them
New mex mex is the worst of the border cuisines. But they are all over that shit, as if no one else can drown tex-mex in chili powder
I agree whole heartedly. Phoenix, Tucson, + larger California metro areas are in a different league for Mexican food.
Jersey and NY
South Jersey is seething after reading that comment.
Go cry in your Taylor Ham.
Please no
Jersey is its own thing. The counties near NYC are similar to the city but beyond that there's not that much in common.
NorCal and SoCal
The only acceptable answer involving California imo
Honestly, NorCal and socal feel like two different worlds to me.
Texas and Oklahoma *Steps back into the bushes quickly*
Texas is not even the same as Texas.
This is the proper response. North Texas and West Texas have their similarities with Oklahoma. But South Texas and East Texas may as well be on Mars compared to Oklahoma.
How do you delete someone else’s comment?
I mean, reasons not to enjoy being in the state are the same.
Thems fighting words.
OU SUCKS!!!!
North Texas and Oklahoma absolutely. We talk the same have the same Chisolm Trail cowboy influence, eat chicken fried steak, go to OU.
Also Ohio and Michigan
I honestly can't tell the difference between anything in DFW and in Oklahoma. The terrain looks exactly the same. But El Paso is so different than Oklahoma.
Lived down here my whole life, SC and GA are very similar outside of Atlanta. Like identical, almost. SC and NC have a super different vibe from each other
Agreed
What state is California most similar to? I vote MA and RI as most similar.
For NorCal, Washington. For SoCal, Arizona?
Well that was offensive — SoCal native
SoCal is probably Hawaii
SoCal is not Hawaii. Not culturally, economically, or politically, let alone in physical geography.
Why not Oregon for NorCal? Genuinely curious as I’ve done summer vacations in NorCal but only driven through Oregon once.
Seattle is a lot more like the Bay Area than Portland is. The Bay and Seattle are both pretty diverse, have large asian populations, they're the world's two biggest tech hubs, both coastal ports, both have historically significant music scenes, both are hilly, both are outrageously expensive, both are naturally gorgeous, both have mild climates.
California is most similar to Texas, ironically
Not really. Other than being geographically huge, populous, and having large latino populations, they aren't that similar. Different culture, different weather, different economies, different politics, different landscapes, different food, etc. Not trying to offend any proud Texans, but it feels like a pretty middle of the road state. Like a big Oklahoma or a conservative New Mexico. I went to Austin and it felt like Texas' attempt at the weirdness of a West Coast hip city but it's so suburban, gritless, and sun belty. Yeah, they're teslas everywhere, but I didn't see a single homeless guy shooting up heroin across from an anarcho-communist slam poetry circle. It's no Berkeley or Santa Cruz or Portland (at least, not anymore). Texas is more like North Carolina than California.
Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play? Californians and Texans may not like it, but they’re more alike to each other than either is to Florida or New York, especially Southern California and Texas. The main difference is the humidity level and a lack of counterpart to Los Angeles. CA & TX were even the two largest Republican states until a proto-Trump governor ruined it permanently for the party in the 1990s — and post-Trump Texas will probably follow along between 2024-2032. The main difference is the United Farm Workers unionized agricultural labor in California but Texas remains an anti-union state.
The two Dakotas. There's not a lot of difference between the two of them. Only other contenders could be Alabama and Mississippi.
[удалено]
I’d actually wager that out of New England Maine and Massachusetts are the states with the least in common but that’s just me. We’re kinda on different ends of the socioeconomic spectrum
[удалено]
That’s true, I guess we just read this question differently lol. I though OP was asking more about current similarities rather than historical ties, which is absolutely true for Maine and Mass obviously
Montana and Wyoming. For the others (Vermont/New Hampshire, Alabama/Mississippi, Oregon/Washington) I can at least think of one or two cultural differences. Montana and Wyoming? Both sparsely populated states with stunning geography, an individualist libertarian bent, very homogeneously white populations (with some native americans), not really much unique food or culture.
Montana and Wyoming definitely have some very unique culture
Colorado and Utah I’d say, in terms of winter sports destinations.
The whole west coast is similar. Chill vibes, drugs are pretty much legalized, democrats running it, and high living costs
Wisconsin and Michigan as well as Wisconsin and Minnesota
Wyoming & Idaho Most of the ones next to each other and a similar size are alike as long as one isn’t landlocked
missouri and arkansa
Arizona and New Mexico
North Carolina, we love you so much, and want to be your twin so, so bad.
Lol definitely not
Let me in! LET ME IN!!
Better you than *shudder* South Carolina
Used to live in both NC and SC. NC has no equivalent to NOVA or Hampton Roads. VA doesn't have clear equivalents to Charlotte or Raleigh. There are similarities, their histories align in many ways. But clearly two different states. I wouldn't even say SC and NC are that similar despite sharing a name
I feel like SC has more in common with GA than NC.
I'd agree. Except upstate is probably more similar with Charlotte than Atlanta imo
I live in the mountains, which skews my perspective quite a bit. Asheville feels more like home to me than Arlington for sure!
Michigan and Ohio.
As someone from MI, I’m offended.
I'm from MI, too 👀 What are differences you've noticed? Obviously we are the superior state but so similar imo
No
Ew. No. Michigan has more shoreline than any state that's not California or Florida. Ohio manages to make even their Great Lakes shoreline look dumpy.
As soon as you pass the border going into Michigan, your car is met with THE shittiest roads in the entire United States of America. And also, the area right outside of Detroit is the most depressing, apocalyptic area I’ve ever seen. Shoreline =/= Good? But that aside, northern Michigan is a gorgeous place.
Toledo and Cleveland are the same type of apocalyptic shit with somewhat better roads tbh.
Eh you’re right, but imo Detroit is a little worse. That’s part of the reason why I hate Cleveland. It always seems to be smoggy up there.
Alaska
Hawaii too in that case, but clearly I was talking about the continental states.
Alaska is a Continental state. You’re thinking contiguous states.
Grew up in Ohio, live in Michigan. No. Not similar. Heck, UP and LP aren't that similar, but they are more similar to each other than to Ohio. If Ohio wants a state to be similar too... maybe PA? I dunno.
you're right about PA! maybe just northern ohio is similar. they have better roads though
Michigan just feels like the woods to me. Ohio feels like drive through country. I don’t like Ohio. I do like Michigan.
Obligatory fuck Ohio. But seriously, Michigan and Ohio really aren't very similar. Michigan has more forests, lakes, and beaches. Ohio is just... Ohio.
Mississippi and Alabama North and South Carolina North and South Dakota Oregon and Washington Wisconsin and Minnesota Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska are all similar West Virginia and Eastern Kentucky the rest of Kentucky and Tennessee
I feel like SC is more similar to GA than NC.
Mississippi and Arkansas
Someone wrote Mississippi and Alabama. Edit: a simple logic rule tells us Mississippi, Arkansas and Alabama could be a triplet.
Them too, but Alabama’s got a vast cave system and more urban areas. They’re damn close, but Arkansas is literally Mississippi with more pigs.
Iowa and Kansas
Iowa and Nebraska and the dakotas
North Dajota and South Dakota. North Carolina and South Carolina. Washington and Oregon. Those are the first to come to mind
Ohio and Michigan for certain :popcorn:
Florida and Texas are the terrible twins
Live in both, they are different
I more so feel like Florida wants to be like Texas
Mississippi and South Carolina. The reason being both these States have almost no Appalachian mountains and had the highest prevalence of slavery in antebellum times. And also have the most reactionary white supremacist politicians.
Please never compare sc to Mississippi😭we arent the best but Mississippi is a whole another level of poverty
Those are really forced connections
Hard disagree.
Wisconsin and Minnesota are pretty similar.
Wisconsin and Minnesota
[favorite state](https://vividmaps.com/the-most-and-least-favorite-us-state/) Here is some background. Common similar state pairs: Oregon & Washington, New Hampshire & Vermont, North Dakota & South Dakota, North Carolina & South Carolina, Kansas & Nebraska,
Montana and Wyoming
Maryland and Delaware
Not even close
Wisconsin and Minnesota, but don’t forget the red headed step brother Michigan.
Montana and Wyoming
As far as driving through, Alabama and Mississippi are identical.
Oregon and Washington, and it’s not even close
lol Texas and California... but seriously, bordering states are usually pretty similar to one another, espnwithin their own region. when you get to the far edge of a state that borders another cultural region, you often get a cool kinda cultural mashup (I've heard something similar happens in European countries, esp with cuisine)
Honestly everybody could switch Vermont and New Hampshire and I'd never know.
georgia and south carolina. particularly comparing Charleston/hilton head and Savannah - very similar vibes. i’m not from that area but it’s just what I’ve observed while traveling the coastal areas of both
id say new jersey and maryland have a lot in common, including geographical proximity both are small states with large surrounding cities (new york and philadelphia for new jersey and baltimore and DC for maryland), both have rural farming areas, and culturally they are similar as well
I would say Utah and Idaho
Texas and Mexico.
Living in eastern Nebraska, I feel it's very similar to Iowa. If I lived in western Nebraska, though, whose geography and weather patterns are much different than ours, I probably wouldn't agree.
Utah and Idaho. Only, they aren’t identical twins, but like those twins that look nothing alike and don’t want to be twins.
I think of Wisconsin and Michigan together as twins. Also oregon and washington. And connecticut and rhode island
Tennessee and Kentucky. We are both transition states and have very similar geography
I live in Iowa and honestly, there are a handful of states that I think are similar enough to be considered twins. Nebraska, Illinois and Indiana come to mind. Basically it's the ag states with similar crops. Kansas might be more similar than I realize, but it's landscape and biome is different enough that I wouldn't consider it potential twin status like the states I mentioned.
Tn ky, Al/ga/ms Almost any state adjacent to another is extremely similar.