Internet Wants to Know: Does Trump Have Better Coverage Than Verizon?

  1. Home
  2. Politics
By Lukas Mikelionis | 5:23 pm, November 10, 2016

You might be preoccupied with such trivial questions like “how did Trump win?” “how high will Trump’s wall be?” and “what’s the fastest way to Canada?” But the most-pressing post-election question is this: Does Trump have better coverage than Verizon?

There’s a claim being made on the Internet that Trump won so many districts in the election that the map of his supporters is even more expansive than the map that shows where you can get an Internet/call connection if you’re a Verizon subscriber. Here at Heat Street, however, we take such claims very seriously.

mpa2uvyx7hlcchicbg0cw_5sn2kdbp9ndmamlfa5ena

According Verizon’s website, the network covers 2.3 million square miles of the country and that should include about 98% of all Americans. This is roughly about 60.5% of America’s land mass. Why is the land mass covered so low relative to the population covered? Mainly because of Alaska, which is massive but has a relatively small population, so there is almost no need for coverage. According to the electoral map, Trump won every single square mile of Alaska, giving him a strong advantage in coverage comparison.

See Verizon’s 4G LTE coverage below:

vzw-current-1-trim

Trump lost large chunks of California, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut to Hillary, while she won some of the south Texas. But even if Hillary had won every square mile those five states, that still wouldn’t compensate for Trump covering all of Alaska. He would have a surplus of more than 200,000 square miles of coverage.

More importantly, Verizon network reaches 98% of the people, while President-elect Trump reached roughly 19% of all U.S. residents. Even if most of Hillary’s voters in were added to that count, the figure still wouldn’t constitute half the population.

FINAL VERDICT: Alaska is the deciding factor. You win, Verizon.

Advertisement