Americans must look at dismal Republican economic data from GOP controlled states

America's richest and poorest states create a much more startling visual than the cliche "red state-blue state" graphics. 

The blog 24/7 Wall Street reports:

More than 2.3 million jobs were created in the US in 2013, the most in any year since 2005. Despite this, income levels and poverty rates did not improve in most of the United States last year, according to recently released figures from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.

While many American households continue to struggle to make ends meet, those in the richest states continued to earn far more than households in the poorest states. Maryland was the wealthiest state in the U.S. again last year, with a median income of $72,483. Mississippi, in turn, was yet again America’s poorest state, with a median income of just $37,963.

Click here to read about the 10 richest US states.- California, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Hawaii, New Jersey, Alaska, Maryland

Click here to read the list of the 10 poorest US states. Oklahoma, Tennessee, Louisiana, South Carolina, New Mexico, Kentucky, Alabama, West Virginia, Arkansas and Mississippi.

(Oklahoma is the 10th poorest US state, but their Senator Jim Inofe is constantly obstructing progressive agendas. His constituents must be even more repressively conservative than Senator Inofe, but his public policy hasn't helped them to improve their dismal economic standing.)

It seems like a hugely important reality check for American voters to begin looking at "rich  states" and "poor states", rather than the red states and blue states divide. When poor states' voters ask why the richer states are better off, they must look at the political leadership, while evaluating the comparison.  

It's difficult to believe Americans would vote for Republicans if they were given data about how GOP controlled states compared to others, where progressives and Democrats control the government.