Texas Triangle

[JManc]

Originally Posted by austlar1

Texas flipping Blue on a local level would mean local governments would regain a lot of autonomy lost to the Republican legislature in the last decade or so and could authorize all kinds of progressive local agenda items (civil rights, environmental, and transit/infrastructure) that the legislature has overturned or threatens to overturn. It would also mean local governments could devise taxpayer supported initiatives (like an additional fuel tax) to support the much needed development of transit infrastructure including perhaps additional commuter rail, light rail, or even heavy rail (subway) investments that are beyond the reach of local governments at the present time. Of course, the legendary frugality of the Texas voter would remain a factor even in a Blue Texas, so change would be incremental at best. One additional benefit would be the redistricting of the states legislative and congressional districts hopefully on a less partisan (I am not holding my breath on that one) basis. Ultimately a shift in the very large Texas congressional delegation will have a lasting impact on affairs in the US Congress. Flipping Blue would make a huge difference.

Absolutely this. The state has neutered local governments they deem as counter to their political agenda. Ironically, it flies in the face of small government / non interference championed by conservatives.

[JAYNYC]

Ah, that moment when politics enters - and begins to dominate - the discussion.

Thread closure coming soon.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by jd3189

^^^ Can’t argue with that. Seemed like Cali was a equal balanced place back then. I would only hope Texas maintains a good balance of moderatism in its future. Same for Florida, another settled swing state.

And considering the bad press and reputation California mono-party government has these days dont be shocked to see a powerful resurgent opposition come back in a big way in coming years.

Rightly or wrongly

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by JManc

Absolutely this. The state has neutered local governments they deem as counter to their political agenda. Ironically, it flies in the face of small government / non interference championed by conservatives.

I don't think many people know this, but most conservatives are for small national governments. Pure Constitutionalist, for example, don't give a damn what the states do, they just want the Federal Government to have limited power.

So, for me, I will never vote for a Democrat for HoR/Senate/President. I have and would vote for a Democrat for a statewide position but prefer a Republican. Locally, I have always voted Democrat because I think they create better cities and I usually don't have a choice anyways lol

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

I don't think many people know this, but most conservatives are for small national governments. Pure Constitutionalist, for example, don't give a damn what the states do, they just want the Federal Government to have limited power.

So, for me, I will never vote for a Democrat for HoR/Senate/President. I have and would vote for a Democrat for a statewide position but prefer a Republican. Locally, I have always voted Democrat because I think they create better cities and I usually don't have a choice anyways lol

^ I am actually the same. I think democrats can work well with cities because they can concern themselves with local issues they care about ie, mass transit, education, helping the poor whatever.

That really isn't relevant to the national level unless for some reason you insist that all states be the same.

And I couldnt be more happy that the GOP is taking up libertarian isolationist policies, if that could keep going and get more extreme that would be fantastic.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by Obadno

And considering the bad press and reputation California mono-party government has these days dont be shocked to see a powerful resurgent opposition come back in a big way in coming years.

Rightly or wrongly

True.

Rightly or wrongly, it's called the swinging of the pendulum. That's how politics work in this great nation. Sometimes it swings right and left, however we all generally fall in the middle and we all get it right at the end of the day.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

I don't think many people know this, but most conservatives are for small national governments. Pure Constitutionalist, for example, don't give a damn what the states do, they just want the Federal Government to have limited power.

So, for me, I will never vote for a Democrat for HoR/Senate/President. I have and would vote for a Democrat for a statewide position but prefer a Republican. Locally, I have always voted Democrat because I think they create better cities and I usually don't have a choice anyways lol

I will never understand that because 'small government' is a huge rallying point here in Texas but Texas's government is by far the largest employer in the state, bureaucratic as hell and very involved. Considering that state governments are more front and center in the vast majority of our lives than the federal government, the irony is not lost with me.

We complain about Trump/ Congress but it's actually the governor/ legislatures who impact us the most. The only interaction I truly have with the federal government is income tax.

I also tend to vote democrat/ republican depending on the office and the particular candidate.

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

I don't think many people know this, but most conservatives are for small national governments. Pure Constitutionalist, for example, don't give a damn what the states do, they just want the Federal Government to have limited power.

So, for me, I will never vote for a Democrat for HoR/Senate/President. I have and would vote for a Democrat for a statewide position but prefer a Republican. Locally, I have always voted Democrat because I think they create better cities and I usually don't have a choice anyways lol

I never thought of it that way. Makes sense for the most part. I still think the federal government should help cities economically and transportation wise, especially for cities that contribute a lot to the total economic prosperity of the whole nation.

[TexasPlaya]

I think Texas has more levers pull to pull to get growth and accommodate growth than people are considering.

[TexasPlaya]

Originally Posted by Shawn

These are all really important points.

Another factor I have been mulling over: just how big can cities in the 21st century actually get in red states with anti-urban, anti-transit, small-gov, low-tax majorities in state Congresses? I’m seriously asking.

Or let’s flip this and say that were Dallas and Houston to actually pass Chicago in metro sizes and were Austin’s to reach 4-5 million, Texas would be California / New York blue.

Probably more than you think. Every major metro has a lopsided growth pattern with no geographic barriers to overcome and holes of ultra low density within it's city limits (especially Houston and San Antonio). Plenty of parking lots to upzone over several decades throughout the main city limits and beyond, especially if car ownership drastically decreases. Lots of levers to pull, especially if the state becomes more amenable to giving development a gentle nudge.

The Texas economy has transformed from being a major exporting economy to being a major exporting economy, major corporate hub, and rising tech hub. I think Texas has a geographic advantage for sustained growth, much of it's due to it's sheer size that allows it's major 4 metros to become their own city states with their own strengths and weaknesses.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by JManc

We complain about Trump/ Congress but it's actually the governor/ legislatures who impact us the most. The only interaction I truly have with the federal government is income tax.

I also tend to vote democrat/ republican depending on the office and the particular candidate.

this is exactly me too.

but now try telling this to my spouse!

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by JManc

I will never understand that because 'small government' is a huge rallying point here in Texas but Texas's government is by far the largest employer in the state, bureaucratic as hell and very involved. Considering that state governments are more front and center in the vast majority of our lives than the federal government, the irony is not lost with me.

We complain about Trump/ Congress but it's actually the governor/ legislatures who impact us the most. The only interaction I truly have with the federal government is income tax.

I also tend to vote democrat/ republican depending on the office and the particular candidate.

You know, I haven't lived in Texas since 2014 but I found the state rather...bureacratic for its famous conservatism. Don't get me wrong, I loved the libertarian high-speed limits on the highways and the fact that lawmakers only met once every two years but in the end, I feel like I had more loops to go through via their DMV and colleges than I do in the much bluer Virginia.

I find it weird, well not really, because public perception is huge, that Texas is always cited as some conservative backwater state. It is not. Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, and Louisana...yes. Texas? No.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by JManc

I will never understand that because 'small government' is a huge rallying point here in Texas but Texas's government is by far the largest employer in the state, bureaucratic as hell and very involved. Considering that state governments are more front and center in the vast majority of our lives than the federal government, the irony is not lost with me.

We complain about Trump/ Congress but it's actually the governor/ legislatures who impact us the most. The only interaction I truly have with the federal government is income tax.

I also tend to vote democrat/ republican depending on the office and the particular candidate.

Houston is a great microcosm of this. It has giant city limit boundaries, but even larger ETJ boundaries. The city has been under the practice of annexing commercial strips for tax dollars and leaving the residential areas to fend for themselves. The result? Millions of people without proper representation who pay higher tax dollars than those living in incorporated towns/suburbs (aka taxation without representation). Going down the line, this leads to weaker infrastructure, poor planning, not much collaboration, and MUD districts that act like mobs.

There's been small rumblings from residents now, mostly newcomers to Houston or millenials, that want to be able to incorporate into their own cities. The biggest obstacle has been state leaders (especially those not even in the Houston area) who for some reason don't want unincorporated Houston broken up into various cities. I'm guessing it's because competition would increase as these unincorporated areas would have more local planning, thus becoming more attractive for corporate relocation which has mostly gone to DFW and Austin.

Originally Posted by jtown,man

I find it weird, well not really, because public perception is huge, that Texas is always cited as some conservative backwater state. It is not. Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, and Louisana...yes. Texas? No.

Yeah my friends in LA were adamant that "Texas is backwater outside of Austin. I would only live in Austin!" before the met me. After giving some knowledge about Texas cities and the differences they have, plus we had one nice visit for a bachelor party, all of that went out the window. Now it's "I didn't know Texas was this diverse" and "I could see myself living in a city but rural Texas scares me". The last quote is a fair one cause I wouldn't live in rural Texas either.

[jd3189]

^^^ I may consider Texas, probably for residency. The cities that I am interested in are San Antonio, El Paso, and maybe Dallas. Houston is cool but feels too much like the bigger version of many of the other Southern cities, from which I consider Atlanta to be the best of all. Dallas at least has somewhat of a more Southwestern flare like the other two cities I've mentioned.

[ThePhun1]

Houston and Dallas are virtual clones. Fort Worth has it's own unique vibe but not so much Dallas, at least in comparison to Houston.

[JManc]

There's nothing Southwestern about Dallas. It has a a plains feel to it. San Antonio, Ft. Worth, El Paso and Austin have a southwest/west vibe. Agree about Houston but it's traditionally been a southern city anyway.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by jd3189

^^^ I may consider Texas, probably for residency. The cities that I am interested in are San Antonio, El Paso, and maybe Dallas. Houston is cool but feels too much like the bigger version of many of the other Southern cities, from which I consider Atlanta to be the best of all. Dallas at least has somewhat of a more Southwestern flare like the other two cities I've mentioned.

Yeah Houston is not for everyone. Even though all of these cities are close, they have many differences.

Houston is the big Southern city that has as many Deep South attributes as Texas ones. It's where Texas won its independence, but it probably feels the least like Texas out of all the other major cities. It's landscape/geography also differs the most out of the other 3 since it's the most green but also the most flat.

Dallas is a mix of South/Midwest. You can definitely see the Midwest attributes in Dallas because out of all Texas cities, Dallas (and most of DFW on Dallas side) have a ton of alleyways. Houston, Austin, and SA have at most just a handful of neighborhoods with alleys. The rolling prairie looks no different than most areas of the western Midwest too.

Austin feels like a battle between California and Texas when you're in the center of town. If a Texan who grew up in suburban DFW or Houston wants the California-like atmosphere without moving there, then they end up here. The majority of Austin's new domestic migrants come from either Harris County or Dallas County.

San Antonio has always done it's own thing and is the last big city before you reach the depths of West Texas. It has the most preserved history in the state which really adds to it's character. Plus, the whole city takes part in Fiesta which is always fun.

El Paso to me just so happens to be in Texas. In a way, it's the western version of Houston. There definitely Texas attributes there, but it pulls a lot from the Southwest region. It has more in common with Albuquerque or Phoenix than the Texas Triangle.

And lastly, often forgotten about since has a name-brand neighbor is Fort Worth, which feels the most stereotypical Texan.

[JAYNYC]

Originally Posted by Trae

Dallas is a mix of South/Midwest. You can definitely see the Midwest attributes in Dallas because out of all Texas cities, Dallas (and most of DFW on Dallas side) have a ton of alleyways. Houston, Austin, and SA have at most just a handful of neighborhoods with alleys. The rolling prairie looks no different than most areas of the western Midwest too.

Dallas is what you would get if Kansas City, Houston and Atlanta merged. Large sprawling city with a huge airport and urban plains landscape, but without the African-American flavor and vibe of the latter two.

[jd3189]

I will say Houston's black culture is nice, being somewhat based on the African American culture it received from New Orleans ( being in the Bayou and all). But New Orleans, Mobile, and other towns in the Gulf besides Florida's contribution are the same in a smaller scale. Houston is just the biggest player in town.


Hopefully, as both cities continue to grow, Houston and Dallas will attain more of a distinct flavor that will prevent them from being seen as one of the same. Austin probably had already achieved this, while being a smaller city.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by JAYNYC

Dallas is what you would get if Kansas City, Houston and Atlanta merged. Large sprawling city with a huge airport and urban plains landscape, but without the African-American flavor and vibe of the latter two.

The big difference is money, Dallas has lots of it and likes to show it off. Mansions, fancy cars, high end fashion, plastic surgery, etc In that sense it has more in common with Los Angeles than Kansas City.

Agree about the terrain resembling Kansas/Missouri with the exception of all the live oaks in Dallas that you don't see further north. Also you see a lot of (non-native) palm trees in Dallas that you won't see in Kansas City. The I-35 corridor is roughly the line between the eastern forests and Great Plains and it's pretty evident as you go from east Dallas to west Ft Worth.