I get all this talk about highways vs rail. There isn't really money to have an exceptional rail system
and an exceptional highway system - it's sort of a 'choose one or the other' situation.' Or I guess you could settle for two mediocre systems.
We know which one the USA has chosen overall. The USA generally does have an amazing highway system compared to most other countries, and in general Amtrak is lacking. But it isn't the very worst, either. Have a look at this map:
What I find interesting is that, even with Amtrak's 'bare bones' system, Almost all the major cities or regions are served. Perhaps not served very well, but at least everyone gets something.
What this suggests to me is that perhaps connecting more cities isn't the most important problem for getting better national rail service... frequency is. So perhaps the better question to answer in this thread is which existing routes deserve more frequency than Amtrak (or others) currently offer?
Threaded Mode