Do you think the united states is too big?

Let's be completely blunt; we're divided as a nation. I don't feel that this is a recent development. I simply feel that access to instant, long distant communication has exposed the societal scam of the country being "united".

Topics such as vaccination, abortion, LGBT rights, healthcare, and guns have shown just how different we are in terms of ideology. There are entire regions of the United States that directly oppose a different region's beliefs.

So I ask you all: Are we too big as a nation?

Is It Normal?
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 22 ) Sort: best | oldest
  • America is supposed to be this divided. We are the UNITED STATES we dont have to agree on everything on a federal level. Some states just need to chill that they cant control what other states do as that was the original purpose of the state system. We are a federation of states, we arent going to agree on everything. Let's not be children about it either.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • The problem I believe is to many people act like children. They have this my way or the highway attitude. Both far left and far right are similar this way. Makes people in the middle like me annoyed by their stupidity. Plus our political class is absolutely corrupt. If they would actually fix the problems in the country instead of work for the one percent the country would be a lot better off. Jmo.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I would like to see a 2nd civil war even though it would be extremely one-sided. The south wouldn't even need to fire a single round, all they would have to do is refuse to give the north food & their population would half it's self in about 3 years do to starvation & riots. Then the south comes in & pops off the stragglers.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • You do realize the midwest is specifically called americas breadbasket right? We dont need to make ethanol with 30% of our corn crop.

      The only reason why the midwest is considered to be swing states is because of the cities. The entire state is usually red districts except for the big cities which have the population centers but dont actually make the food.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • "You do realize the midwest is specifically called americas breadbasket right?"

        Yes & if they secede they will help starve old America like I said.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • No those are midwestern states. Our winters can get down to -40 degrees farenheit. By definition we are not southerners.

          Should of said conservative or swing states. Defining the "resistance" to the south is just stupid.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
    • How do you define south? The three top food producing states are California, Iowa, and Nebraska. Followed by Texas, Minnesota, and Illinois.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • "How do you define south?"

        How most people I've talked to IRL do (which I think is stupid) by red/conservative/rural/bible belt states which would include. (not counting Alaska or Hawaii)
        Iowa
        Nebraska
        Texas
        Kansas
        North Carolina
        Indiana
        North Dakota
        South Dakota
        Ohio
        Arkansas
        Georgia
        Missouri
        Idaho
        Florida
        Oklahoma
        Mississippi
        Alabama
        Kentucky
        Montana
        Louisiana
        Arizona
        Tennessee
        South Carolina
        Utah
        Wyoming
        West Virginia
        ^^^23 of which are in the top 35

        Unsure about Wisconsin, Pennsylvania & Michigan because they're flippy.

        And if it does happen Washington, Colorado, Oregon, Nevada, New Mexico & California will be taken over do to them being severely cut off from their other ally states (& maybe Minnesota & Illinois too if Wisconsin & Michigan secede)

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • But that is an ideology you are describing. South is a geographical reference. But good job insulting half the country with an ignorant reference.

          It's cute you think the west coast can't survive without the rest of the country. I'm almost embarrassed for you.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
            -
          • "But that is an ideology you are describing. South is a geographical reference."

            I know this & is why I said I think it's stupid that the majority of people I've talked to refer to that as the south which you completely ignored because that wouldn't help your narrative know would it.

            "But good job insulting half the country with an ignorant reference."

            Lie: There was no insult, try again.

            "It's cute you think the west coast can't survive without the rest of the country."

            If it was cut off from it's eastern allies while simultaneously being invaded then no it would not survive. Almost none of the seceding States would be cut off from each other unlike its enemies. Therefore providing them a safer supply line to freely trade with & provide martial support to allying States.

            "I'm almost embarrassed for you"

            You are in no position to. You failed to provide an argument & resorted to condescending lies. You are not the Victor here.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
              -
            • The majority of the people you talk to think Montana and Iowa are the south!? I don't know what's worse, that people actually think this, or that you only talk to people who think this. Broaden your perspective dude. I am confident that I talk to more people than you do from a wide variety of backgrounds and have never heard this gross error in information. Although I have heard that some people think Seattle is the state above California. When people are that dumb, it's really hard to take them seriously. And since these people are so bad at geography, pretty sure they would fail the invasion and attack themselves in error.

              Can't argue with stupid. But you can mock it.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
  • No it’s fine that size.

    China could do with being completely sunk into the ocean however.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Too big to have strict federal government. Because then atleast half thr country is mad when a president is elected. Your governor should be far more important to you than your president. Let the states decide what they want to do on most things. If you dont like how your state is governed move to a state that is governed how you like.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • what are we gonna do give land away? hell no our ancestors died for this land we arent giving a fucking centimeter

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Land is only yours if you can defend it.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • defending American soil from a land invasion by all but china would be incredibly easy

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • You forget about the existance of the Pacific Ocean. It takes days to get from china to the USA. All of them being stalked by modern submarines and sunk by mines.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
  • The division is more between urban and rural areas, genders and occupations.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Big means two things here. We have numbers of people, which is kind of irrelevant when you consider places like China and India. And you have geographically big as well. Which is meaningless as well because you have to look at the available resources. So I would argue that no, it's not too big. The problem is multi-faceted. Historically we are still a young nation. Our perspective on world issues is skewed by the fact that we aren't really that different from each other, but insist we are. We look for reasons to divide ourselves instead of looking for commonalities.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • This is a fairly reasonable response. I'm mostly just concerned that the two moral lenses that are being used are so disproportionate from one another that there's not much genuine hope of reconciliation or compromise.

      I had originally typed out a much more in depth version of this post on my Facebook but decided against it. (Mostly because I know it would cause more drama than necessary in my personal life.)

      Comment Hidden ( show )
Add A Comment