How do we define diversity in the United States? The census offers breakdowns by age, race, gender and other characteristics. Or we could also look at party registration and election results to measure political diversity.
But what if we could combine various factors to determine which are truly the most and least diverse states in the country? We can now, because the number-crunchers at WalletHub developed an algorithm and ranking of their own.
And the results show both red and blue states spread throughout the list, because political diversity is one of the factors included in the calculations.
“When most people hear the word “diversity”, they think of race/ethnicity. However, many types of diversity include socioeconomic status (e.g., education, income, and occupation), religion, political ideology, household size, immigrant status, language, and geography. States are also diverse within them. Depending on where a person lives in a state, such as in an urban, suburban, or rural area, can dictate what they experience culturally,” said Rashawn Ray, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Every state was scored in six categories of diversity: socio-economic, cultural, economic, household, religious and political. The highest score went to liberal California, which was followed closely by conservative Texas.
The Golden State ranked first in both socio-economic and cultural diversity. While Texas didn’t lead in any categories, it was fourth in cultural diversity, sixth in religious diversity and ninth in socio-economic diversity.
The rest of the top 10 is dominated by states from the East Coast and Southwest: Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, New Mexico, Florida, Maryland, Nevada and Arizona.
“Living in a diverse environment makes it easier to see that even if there are differences, most of us share similar goals and priorities like keeping our families healthy and safe, educating our kids in a supportive environment, and earning a good living,” said Andrew Burnstine, an associate professor in Lynn University’s College of Business and Management.
The 10 least diverse states, according to WalletHub, are (from 41 to 50): Iowa, Ohio, Utah, Wyoming, Kentucky, Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine and West Virginia.
West Virginia ranks last in both the socio-economic and cultural diversity categories, and in the bottom 10 in religious and political diversity.
Government should take advantage of the nation’s diversity, according to researchers and academics consulted by WalletHub.
“The United States could highlight the achievements of diverse individuals and groups. States could also make data-driven decisions about which groups may need additional support to thrive and in what ways,” said Lori Martin, a professor of African and African American Studies, humanities and social sciences at Louisiana State University. “This may include supporting under-resourced schools and black-owned businesses. States must demonstrate a commitment to equity, which is not the same as equality.”
WalletHub broke the six categories down into 14 data points, including household income, education, race, birthplace, occupations, marital status, age, religion and political affiliation.
States were also ranked within those subcategories. Among them:
- Income: Utah was at the most diverse; Mississippi was the least.
- Educational attainment: Massachusetts; West Virginia.
- Race and ethnicity: Hawaii; Maine.
- Language: California; West Virginia.
- Birthplace: Nevada; Louisiana.
- Industry: Texas; Massachusetts.
- Occupation: Mississippi; Massachusetts.
- Worker class: Alaska; Indiana.
- Marital status: Mississippi; Utah.
- Generations: Florida; Utah.
- Household type: New Mexico;
- Household size: Utah; West Virginia.
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.