Fact = Every state in the union consists of both urban and rural areas. These charts are considering states as a whole, not parsing it out into cities vs. rural areas, so trying to distinguish between Democrat vs. Republican control on an urban/rural divide should have absolutely no bearing on these rankings. In fact, if we use the logic that Democrats control all the large cities and large cities are inherently more corrupt, we'd expect to see this list populated by states with the largest population centers: New York, California, Texas, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, etc. If the urban corruption is influencing this list so heavily, why are states without lots of large urban centers showing up? Why Alaska, Mississippi, Alabama and South Dakota, states that are predominantly rural? Why is the list of least corrupt states dominated by states that traditionally vote liberal: Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Vermont?
Actually, looking through that list, there doesn't seem to be any real correllation between political affiliation and corruption at all. Utah, Nebraska and Kansas are very conservative and they're also not corrupt; New York, Pennsylvania and Illinois are liberal and they're corrupt. There's a scattershot of red and blue throughout the rankings, enough so that you couldn't say "this is a red state, therefore it will be corrupt." But let's not let that stop us from twisting the data to indicate that <insert political party> are a bunch of crooks and liars.