It's not, because of the scales involved. One is a heavily agrarian/rural state and the other is a combination of rural and major metropolises. Because of how

It's not, because of the scales involved. One is a heavily agrarian/rural state and the other is a combination of rural and major metropolises. Because of how the states are divided, it becomes a compare "nearly pure rural" to "vibrant mix of major rural, suburban and urban" communities. Some states are just absolutely tiny by population and entirely rural. And it's just not an apples to apples comparison to compare one rural area with one rural/urban area. A better comparison would be just Texas's rural areas to Nebraska, without any of its cities. When comparing apples to oranges this way, it's a roundabout way of saying "just be rural" or "don't even try to solve urban problems".