Work training to attend, but which city should I go to? YOU DECIDE!

[cw42]

I have not been to any of these cities (except for DC). I won't have a car, so a more walkable city would be nice, and i'd like to do the whole touristy thing if I have time.

 

[Ns1]

LA is not walkable, at all.

 

[UpgradeFailure]

What month and for how long?

 

[Crusty]

Dallas blows.

 

[cw42]

Originally posted by: UpgradeFailure
What month and for how long?

May or June... only a few days

 

[UpgradeFailure]

Originally posted by: cw42

Originally posted by: UpgradeFailure
What month and for how long?

May or June... only a few days

Chicago for sure then, weather is beautiful during those months.

 

[mykol1010]

If you are car-less, then I think SF is the best...especially if it is in the near future since spring and summer is rolling around. You can see everything via trolley and subway!

 

[BeauJangles]

chicago is most accessible without a car

 

[LS21]

i would vote chicago (im from california and texas)

for someone from DC, i vote seattle or SF..

 

[skim milk]

LA sucks without a car

so I'd choose Chicago or SF

 

[Jawo]

I'm from DC, but would choose SF in a heartbeat. Its such an awesome city with great public transportation. Chicago would be my second choice.

 

[Oil]

Scratch Dallas and LA off your list, definitely not walkable.

Go to SF

 

[Cdubneeddeal]

Seattle. Depends on where you're staying but if you're in the downtown area, walking is fairly easy. By the weather will be perfect. Not too hot, not too cold.

 

[Kaieye]

SF will be cold so bring a light jacket and no shorts or sunglasses.

 

[Eeezee]

Process of elimination:

Chicago sucks
Dallas REALLY sucks
DC REALLY REALLY sucks (it's the chocolate city with a marshmellow center and a graham cracker crust of corruption)
LA is the worst place on that list, especially without a car
Seattle kinda sucks

San Fransisco is awesome

San Fransisco wins!

(I've been to all of these cities several times, I originate from AZ, so I'm not too biased...)

 

[MotionMan]

Nobody walks in LA.

I voted for SF because it's my hometown and I love being a tourist there: Fisherman's Wharf, Pier 39, Alcatraz, Ghirardelli Square, GG Bridge, GG Park (De Young Museum, Academy of Sciences), Cable cars, the baseball stadium (does it have another new name, yet?), Lombard Street, The Haight, etc...

Also, I see you are in Jersey, so you would get to see the whole country on your way.

MotionMan

 

[GhettoFob]

SF

 

[Mahaguru]

Completely depends on what area of each city you are staying. But Dallas is out of the question for the car less.

 

[thepd7]

Contrary to the other 2 opinions, Dallas doesn't suck but I agree with those saying you can't walk it. I spent 22 years there and you definitely don't want to try to get around without a car.

 

[RichieZ]

I vote for SF.

I went to school in Chicago for 4 years it kind of sucks.
I worked in LA for about 9 months, it would suck without a car.
I have never been to Dallas, but San Antonio wasn't all the fun. The only place I want to go in Texas is Austin, and yea you would probably need a car.
DC, you've already been too.
Seattle could be interesting.

But the logical choice is SF

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

SF, Chicago, or Seattle.

I say SF because I'm from the Bay Area.

Just avoid LA.

 

[slayer202]

one of the cali choices. being from the east coast it would be easier to visit the others

 

[Orsorum]

Chicago, SF, or Seattle.

 

[Baked]

Not SF. Stay away!

 

[ric1287]

chicago....alot to do, fairly decent public transit