Huh, I myself am Petworthy (New Hampshire and Allison).
Yeah, I’d quite gladly live in almost any of these. In fact I hope to live in at least three or four of them at some point during my life. I went with Boston, but if it were multiple choice, I’d have picked eight or ten.
I was torn between San Diego and San Francisco, but ended up opting for San Francisco so we would be near mrAru’s mom and family. I assume it also includes a job to support the cost of living there?
Charlotte, NC
Is probably the closest fit to my current southern lifestyle.
I’m happy in Boston so I voted to stay. But I could easily live in Seattle, SF, or Denver for their proximity to mountains and winter.
Ditto. And still close enough to visit the extended family somewhat regularly.
I went with Chicago - I live in the burbs here and could definitely handle living in he city proper. I love this city too much to want to leave. I’ve visited probably 2/3rds of the other cities on the list.
I only spent one summer living in San Francisco, and so it’s possible I just didn’t master the system - but while it was certainly good, I thought it didn’t match the coverage of DC’s metro. NYC is (I grudgingly admit) the very best there is, but I’d put DC not-far behind it, and San Francisco a bit behind DC.
Or Odessa, Texas. I turned down an outstanding job not long ago precisely because I just couldn’t stand the idea of living there. (Sorry, OdessaDopers!)
Leaving aside Chicago - it’s only 45 minutes from me now, so I could still easily see my family and such.
I picked Vegas. It seems to have the least of the “City Snobs” and it surrounded by great natural beauty. Plus good weather, and always something to do!
We’re actually looking to retire there.
New York: first in votes, last in reasons.
Makes sense really. If you could see yourself anywhere but NY, you probably don’t belong there.
Nice! Varnum and Grant Circle. We’ve probably seen each other and not known it.
I already live in San Antonio, and mostly like it. I picked Phoenix because I imagine it’s closest to San Antonio in terms of size, climate, and way of life.
If I didn’t have to life in the city, and could instead live in one of the smaller bay area towns surrounding it, I’d pick San Francisco. In the city, however, the traffic, tourist, and lack of avalible parking would drive me to madness in about 6 months.
Chicago is my favorite large city, so I picked that.
I don’t even mind the weather.
There are several cities on the list I’d like to live in. Boston, Chicago, San Antonio, San Diego, Denver…
I finally decided that my kind of town, Chicago is.
Well I already live in San Diego so I picked San Francisco.
I’ve lived in San Francisco for 23 years without a car. There is absolutely no place within the city that isn’t accessbile by public transportation. For anyone who is looking to live in San Francisco, I would strongly recommend not having a car. You may need one if you want to travel around outside the city, but that’s certainly true of DC as well.
Hello fellow San Antonian!
I chose Atlanta, because that’s where I grew up. Hated the traffic though, but it had great restaurants. San Antonio has easy traffic, but crappy restaurants.
Wow. I have moved over the course of my life away from cities in general. Given that I had to choose one, I picked Boston. Once there, I would try to move away though.
San Francisco: weather, public transit, restaurants, entertainment. It’s got everything but cheap real estate.
Was it your intention to have us choose a city OTHER than where we live currently, if our city is already on this list? Didn’t want to vote until I understood that.