Hi,I just read a list of the most fun places to visit and Milwaukee,Wisconsin is number one! Why? I've been to New Orleans,Wash.,DC,
Chicago,San Francisco......What does Milwaukee have that makes it the most fun place to visit? Just wondering.....

Milwaukee, believe it or not, is a very culturally diverse city - and they throw the best festival, Summerfest, in the business! The ethnic restaurants are plentiful as well as the critically acclamined ones with such notable chefs as Sandy D'Amato. Miller Park with its awesome retractable dome and home of the Milwaukee Brewers, is a sight to behold. Just ask Bruce, the Boss, Springsteen, who just played in this venue last month to tens of thousands of loyal fans. Lake Michigan and its acitivites is another draw. Also, check out the new addition to the art museum, the Calatrava. Quite possibly one of the most unique structures this side of the Mississippi. Or the other side, IMO. So, this is a few reason why Milwaukee is a "Great Place on a Great Lake"

If you look at who compiled the list and how they did it I'm sure that'll be revealing.
Milwaukee won't make anyone's top 20 list of 'most fun places to visit' if you're ranking cities by number of things to do and diversity. Just the sheer volume of options in places like LA, NYC, Chicago, SF, Boston, DC, etc will leave Milwaukee on the lower rungs of the ladder.
Not that Milwaukee's without its charms. It's underappreciated overall IMO. Would depend on how you prioritize factors in the list.

How can you say it won't make anyone's top 20, when the original post stated it was #1 in that particular poll. It may not have the "volume" you speak of, but it also doesn't have "volume" of crime. IMO this makes it a WHOLE lot of fun!!

Different people have different criteria for vacation destinations. While it may not be that appealing to you, it someone elses favorite destination.

I've been there and enjoyed it. It is a fun place. But to name it the number one spot to have fun in the US??? You've got to be kidding me.

Just as one example, going to theatre is number one fun for me. While there is some theatre there, we were there for two nights and there was NO theatre going on, period. NONE.

My comment was "Milwaukee won't make anyone's top 20 list of 'most fun places to visit' IF YOU'RE RANKING CITIES BY NUMBER OF THINGS TO DO AND DIVERSITY".

That's also why I said that if the original poster would explain how the ranking was done, it would be evident why Milwaukee was rated #1. He or she seemed curious how this could be. Surely the answer is in the ranking methods.
Just for kicks I did a google search of 'most fun city' rankings. And one ranking came up from cranium.com.
The title is "America's Most Fun Cities".
It's a perfect example of why you get strange results if you simply crunch a bunch of numbers together (like number of toy stores and dance performances per capita, which were criteria in this list).
Results? Milwaukee ranked #14...and was considered a LOT more fun than dull places like New Orleans at #50, Boston #42, NYC #41, and LA #26.

I think I'll pass on using a list like that to plan a vacation.

IMO it is very ordinary to visit places such as Boston, NY, New Orleans and the like. Everybody does it. The true gem in traveling is finding the diamond in the rough. I have been to most of these cities and you can have it. The traffic alone, mass transit or not, can make these cities a nightmare. So, while you're sitting in traffic, I'll be partying the night away!

I thought this poll had Minneapolis has number one. That one had Las Vegas as #25.Yes,it's all in how the numbers are crunched. But in fairness to Milwaukee, they did have the ambition to have Santiago Calatrava design a stunning, birdlike museum of art on its river bank.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but it's on the LAKEfront, not the river. Since Lake Michigan is one of the gems of Midwest living, let's give credit where credit is due.

As former Chicagoans now living in rural Wisconsin, we find Milwaukee a delightful city getaway, without the hassle and congestion of Chicago.

No THEATRE!! How dreadful that must have been... and you lived to tell about it. Two whole nights without the theatre. Were you without caviar too? When I visit a different city, I like to do what is indigenous to that area. So, if you must theatre, don't go to Milwaukee!

You are right designmr, it was Minneapolis that was ranked as the most fun city, NOT Milwaukee. I have been to Milwaukee before and would agree that it may not be the most exciting place, but there are a lot of places that could be worse.

I think Patrick's point was that the entertainment options in Milwaukee are more limited than in the larger cities mentioned. It doesn't have the same range of offerings, so it won't appeal to as many different types of people.

What a stupid post you did, Nicolette! I didn't say I couldn't live without theatre, but when a city starts limiting options and doesn't have certain things that would be fun to many people, it seems unjustifiable that they would still be called the place as having the MOST fun things to do. Are you a moron for not understanding that limiting choices of fun makes a place have FEWER fun things to do instead of MORE? That seems like a pretty basic concept to me. If there were no sports wouldn't that also make it LESS FUN for some people. Or no nightclubs? Sure there are other things to do, but fewer choices.

I beleve you didn't look hard enough to find a theatrical performance. I have lived here all my life, and there is plenty. You're probably just ignorant, but that's ok.

No, Nicolette. On a particular Wednesday and Thursday nights in July there were NO live theatre performances. I saw where there was something (ONE SHOW) playing on Friday and Saturday only. There were also no "summer theatres" and all the more major groups were totally dark for the summer. Trust Me. You probably don't know but by theatrical performances I'm talking about a theatre with a stage where real live people get up and perform a prewritten play. It's different from movies. Just so you know.

If you mean by going to the tourist office, checking with the actual major theatres in town to ask if they knew of anything (but that's how I found they were all closed down for the summer), looking in the newspaper and that local magazine wasn't looking hard enough then yes you are right, however. Maybe they are incredibly secretive about their theatre in Milwaukee.

By the way, I loved Milwaukee, but your idiotic responses are just kind of hard to take.

And you are right. I'm totally ignorant about theatre in Milwaukee. That's not an insult, it's a fact. All I know is that is very limited there in the summer months.

I just "let my fingers do the walking" and checked my local yellow pages. There are no less than 47 theatrical stages in the greater Milwaukee area. No, this does NOT include Marcus and the like. So, I guess ignorance is bliss.

I guess the useful part of this discussion is over.
The one Milwaukee resident participating doesn't seem to be a very good spokesperson for the city.