Why Is the US so large?

[hmkpoker]

We've got atheists and theocrats, capitalists and socialists, social fascists and libertarians, all living under the same roof, trying to force everyone to live the way they want to live. I can't possibly imagine how breaking down the dynasty into groups that cater to what the people (read: individuals with different preferences) want is a bad thing

[LadyWrestler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The middle-america vs. coasts is a lazy false dichotomy based on overbroad mapping of results. If you break it down county by county or district by district the country is basically purple.

[/ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

I cannot stop laughing at that map! LOL. Is that supposed to be the USA? If so, I think it is about to attack and jump on South America and then there will be a bunch of little Americas in about 9 months. What the heck is this thread about anyway? THAT map is the funniest thing I have seen on 2+2 since I started coming in here! I literally cannot stop LAUGHING at that thing! The map is priceless! LOL! I need to get some peach schnapps and come back and look at that map some more. Wow! I need a box of tissues!

[timotheeeee]

[ QUOTE ]
We've got atheists and theocrats, capitalists and socialists, social fascists and libertarians, all living under the same roof, trying to force everyone to live the way they want to live. I can't possibly imagine how breaking down the dynasty into groups that cater to what the people (read: individuals with different preferences) want is a bad thing

[/ QUOTE ]

[canis582]

The founders wanted each state to have a high degree of autonomy. Instead, we have DEA agents from washington DC destroying people's medicine in CA.

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]
The founders wanted each state to have a high degree of autonomy. Instead, we have DEA agents from washington DC destroying people's medicine in CA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Lincoln.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The founders wanted each state to have a high degree of autonomy. Instead, we have DEA agents from washington DC destroying people's medicine in CA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Lincoln.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Indiana]

Have you guys looked at the difference in voting patterns before and after LBJ's civil rights act? Boy that changed everything about american politics and voter trends.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
We've got atheists and theocrats, capitalists and socialists, social fascists and libertarians, all living under the same roof, trying to force everyone to live the way they want to live. I can't possibly imagine how breaking down the dynasty into groups that cater to what the people (read: individuals with different preferences) want is a bad thing

[/ QUOTE ]

In an earlier day and age, this was usually referred to as "the marketplace of ideas." It was generally considered to be a very good thing.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
I cannot stop laughing at that map! LOL. Is that supposed to be the USA? If so, I think it is about to attack and jump on South America and then there will be a bunch of little Americas in about 9 months. What the heck is this thread about anyway? THAT map is the funniest thing I have seen on 2+2 since I started coming in here! I literally cannot stop LAUGHING at that thing! The map is priceless! LOL! I need to get some peach schnapps and come back and look at that map some more. Wow! I need a box of tissues!

[/ QUOTE ]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showth...rue#Post4848606

If you don't feel like clicking on the link:

It's a cartogram meant to display Presidential voting preferences by county weighted by population (which is why it looks all distorted -- the East and West coasts are 'big' because more people live there; the Plains states are 'small' because less people live there) and using shades of colors between red and blue (i.e., purple) to account for the margin of differences between the two parties -- that is, if President Bush won the county with 55% of the vote, or if Sen. Kerry won the county with 53% of the vote, the tone of the county was adjusted between red and blue to account for the small margin, which is why you see so much purple on the map (the margins weren't very wide in many counties). Obviously, if President Bush won the county by a wide margin, the more 'red' the county would be while if Sen. Kerry won the county by a wide margin, the more 'blue' it would be.

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
My 20th century history class today discussed the breaking of the dynasties in Europe, and the breaking down of Europe into smaller and smaller states, with like-minded people forming nations.

Why has this not happened in the United States, or is this something that is beginning to happen in the United States? A look at the US map during elections and polls shows a clear disparity in the lines of thinking between Middle America and the two coasts.

What would the effects be like if the US were to go through a transition like this? Do the benefits of having such a large country outweigh the negatives of having such division between people?

[/ QUOTE ]

To address the actual question rather than the underlying assumptions, the answer lies in a federalist system.

There are a ton of things that vary by state--fairly important things. Most of the things the so called red staters and blue staters disagree about are state issues. There's very little that the federal government does that's actually worth fighting for.