> America is a huge country and we've been discovering over the last decade that we are a lot more divided than we realized.

This is pretty much exclusively true of sheltered relatively affluent (“middle class” in popular use, but including the upper income end of the working class) people born around 1980 who reached social awareness in the brief local minimum of general social division (but an not of partisan political division, which was gearing up quite hard at the time) of the mid- to late-1990s.

Everyone else, pretty much, was already aware of the underlying divisions, even if they were enjoying the brief respite in the immediate palpability of them.

Doesn't that just encourage a positive feedback loop? On a large scale, fleeing a poorly run state increases the likelihood that those running the state continue to do so, while also increasing polarization. It often seems that the goals of both parties are to push so hard to their own side that the other party will magically capitulate. But as we've seen for at least the last 20 years, and likely much longer, every issue can be framed as an existential threat, where the only acceptable way forward is to double down.

Strangely, all of those countries agree on important societal issues.

Yeah, the only odd one out here is England with it's US-like disdain for workers' rights, tenants' rights, paid college education, general idea that poor people deserve to suffer and raci^H^H^H^Hhate for immigration.

cough Brexit cough

Brexit was a vote by the ignored masses on important issues.

I bet my life it wouldn't have happened if the UK gov implemented the same workers protections and immigration rules as Germany, for example.

Like we all now that buying votes is a very sustainable thing to do...

Which state is that?

> Luckily in America we can just move to a state where reasonable people run things.

Wait 4 years, or 2 years for a recall…

I don't understand this argument, though. You can make it about literally any group that includes more than two people.

If it means that you can't say anything about a large group of people, I'm not sure I agree, given that most countries can agree on enough things to be governed. I'm not exactly sure what the point of the argument is.