Project and content management for Contemporary Authors volumes
WORK TITLE: Where Did You Get This Number
WORK NOTES:
PSEUDONYM(S):
BIRTHDATE:
WEBSITE:
CITY:
STATE: NY
COUNTRY: United States
NATIONALITY:
RESEARCHER NOTES:
| LC control no.: | n 2018019463 |
|---|---|
| LCCN Permalink: | https://lccn.loc.gov/n2018019463 |
| HEADING: | Salvanto, Anthony |
| 000 | 00311nz a2200109n 450 |
| 001 | 10718053 |
| 005 | 20180409145540.0 |
| 008 | 180409n| azannaabn |n aaa |
| 010 | __ |a n 2018019463 |
| 040 | __ |a DLC |b eng |e rda |c DLC |
| 100 | 1_ |a Salvanto, Anthony |
| 670 | __ |a Where did you get this number?, 2018: |b ECIP t.p. (Anthony Salvanto) |
PERSONAL
Male.
EDUCATION:Tufts University, B.A.; University of California, Irvine, Ph.D.
ADDRESS
CAREER
Writer and political scientist. CBS News, New York, NY, manager of surveys and then director of Elections and Surveys, 2002–; appears regularly on CBS News broadcasts and platforms.
WRITINGS
Contributor to professional journals.
SIDELIGHTS
Anthony Salvanto earned his graduate degree in political science. In addition to U.S. politics and elections, his specialities include voting, polling, and public opinion. He began working with CBS News in 2002, guiding the network in relation to surveys, polls, and elections. He helped CBS institute new modeling and interviewing methods for elections and polling. Salvanto contributes to professional journals, primarily writing about a wide range of topics, from the Iraq War, health care, and immigration to various voter groups and partisanship. He writes academic conference papers, primarily about voting behavior and sampling techniques.
In his book titled Where Did You Get This Number? A Pollster’s Guide to Making Sense of the World, Salvanto examines the world of polling and pollsters. In the process he comments on where the United States currently stands as a nation and where it may be headed. Where Did You Get This Number? begins on election night 2016. Although the results of the U.S. presidential election won by Donald Trump were surprising to many Americans, Salvanto was not one of them. Salvanto told Guardian Online contributor Jake Nevins that he decided to write the book right after the election, adding he wanted inform a general audience about “how polling works … in a way that’s accessible,” going on to note: “It’s not about the numbers; it’s the stories that the numbers tell.”
In his interview with Nevins, Salvanto commented on his goals for the book. “I’d like people to read the whole thing to see all that a poll can tell you and demand that your pollster not just predict the world, but explain it,” Salvanto noted in the Guardian Online article. Salvanto went on to explain how different factors in both Trump’s campaign and that of his opponent, Hilary Clinton, proved the polls to be wrong. “I want to … say to everyone, ‘Demand that your pollster tell you all the things people are thinking and feeling and why,’ and when you see that larger picture, you probably won’t be surprised by much,” explained Salvanto in the Guardian online.
As the book progresses, Salvanto “proceeds, in digestible and timely fashion, to demystify the world of polling and pollsters,” noted Guardian Online contributor Jake Nevins. As he explores polling, elections, and American politics, Salvanto explains how people can read beyond the political headlines. Using the 2016 election results, Salvanto stresses how polls often appear to have a certainty about them. However, he write that, in reality, they only reveal probabilities, as evidenced by the polls showing that Trump had little chance of winning the election. Salvanto notes the public does not like uncertainty and typically wants to view things as a yes or no paradigm and not in terms of probability.
Salvanto examines a number of polls beyond the 2016 presidential election, including polls of gun owners. He notes that polls focusing on single-issue gun control voters find many areas of agreement between the two sides but also broad areas of disagreement that verge on hatred. As a result, people committed to their political parties typically paint their opponents as enemies, even when they are moving toward agreement with their opposition on certain issues. Salvanto also discusses how polling and public opinion sampling influences many aspects of American life, from choices in politics to what we want to consume. Despite his caution about too much reliance on predictions based on polls, Salvanto writes many studies conducted over a long time have shown that polls have a good record for accuracy, including the national polling data for the 2016 presidential election.
“Salvanto’s explanations and real-world examples add nuance to the numbers and graphs that fill the news,” wrote a review for Publishers Weekly. A Kirkus Reviews contributor called Where Did You Get My Number? “a revealing look at the numbers, how they’re derived and interpreted, and how they sometimes fail us.”
BIOCRIT
PERIODICALS
Kirkus Reviews, Jun 15, 2018, review of Where Did You Get This Number? A Pollster’s Guide to Making Sense of the World.
Publishers Weekly, June 18, 2018, review of Where Did You Get This Number?, p. 99.
ONLINE
CBS News website, https://www.cbsnews.com/ (October 23, 2018), author profile.
Guardian Online, https://www.theguardian.com/ (August 2, 2018), Jake Nevins, “Behind the Numbers: What Can a Pollster Teach Us about Politics?,” review of Where Did You Get This Number?
Wall Street Journal Online, https://www.wsj.com/ (August 10, 2018), Anthony Salvanto, “To Trust Polls, Dig Deeper Into The Results,” (adopted from Where Did You Get This Number?).
WFAE website, http://www.wfae.org/ (August 22, 2018), Chris Miller, “Charlotte Talks: Who’s Up, Who’s Down, And Does It Matter? Making Sense Of Election Polls.”
Anthony Salvanto
Anthony Salvanto
Anthony Salvanto
CBS News
Anthony Salvanto, Ph.D, is CBS News' director of Elections and Surveys. He oversees all polling across the nation, states and congressional races, and heads the CBS News Decision Desk that estimates outcomes on election nights. Salvanto appears regularly across all CBS News broadcasts and platforms.
At CBS News, Salvanto covered the 2016 election with regular state polling with the Battleground Tracker surveys, the most comprehensive look at the state by state races that CBS News had done to that point. He covered the 2014 and 2010 midterm campaigns, the Presidential races of 2012, 2008 and 2004, and the primary races those years in Iowa, New Hampshire and across the country. He has done polling and written on topics ranging from the Iraq war, to health care, immigration, the stock market crash and subsequent recession and Americans' reactions, as well as on various voter groups, and partisanship.
Salvanto helped deploy new modeling and interviewing methods for elections and polling at CBS News including online interviewing, list-based sampling and the use of cell phones. He first joined CBS News in 2002 as Manager of Surveys.
Anthony earned his Ph.D. in Political Science at the University of California, Irvine, and B.A. at Tufts University. He is the author of "Where Did You Get This Number: A Pollster's Guide to Making Sense of the World" and his scholarly writings have appeared in research journals and edited volumes, as well as various academic conference papers, covering topics on voting behavior and sampling techniques.
Anthony Salvanto
Anthony Salvanto, PhD, is CBS News Director of Elections and Surveys. He currently conducts all polling across the nation, states, and congressional races, and heads the Decision Desk that projects outcomes on Election Nights. He appears regularly on Face the Nation, the CBS Evening News, CBS This Morning, and more. Where Did You Get This Number? is his first book.
nthony M. Salvanto
Director of Elections at CBS News
Greater New York City Area
See contact info
See contact info
See connections (220)
220 connections
Specialties: U.S. Politics & Elections, Voting, Polling, Public Opinion, Hockey
Experience
CBS News
Director of Elections
Company Name CBS News
Dates Employed 2002 – Present
Employment Duration 16 yrs
Interests
Jill Schlesinger
Jill SchlesingerJill Schlesinger is a LinkedIn Influencer
CBS News Business Analyst, host of "Better Off" podcast and "Jill on Money" radio show, Senior CFP Board Ambassador
682,400 followers
NYAAPOR
NYAAPOR
371 members
American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR)
American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR)
3,902 members
CBS News
CBS News
34,474 followers
Salvanto, Anthony: WHERE DID YOU GET THIS NUMBER?
Kirkus Reviews.
(June 15, 2018): From Book Review Index Plus. COPYRIGHT 2018 Kirkus Media LLC http://www.kirkusreviews.com/
Full Text:
Salvanto, Anthony WHERE DID YOU GET THIS NUMBER? Simon & Schuster (Adult Nonfiction) $26.00 8, 21 ISBN: 978-1-5011-7483-4
The inside dope on how polls work--and don't work--from CBS's News Director of Elections and Surveys.
When the phone rings and someone asks for your opinion on a political matter, writes Salvanto, kindly take the call and give an answer. Polls are imperfect measures, but perhaps less imperfect than we think--especially, writes the author, if we disagree with the result. They differ, of course, and they can be errant in giving an impression of certainty when they indicate only probability; think of all the polls showing that Donald Trump had no chance of winning the last election. There is a vast difference between certainty and possibility, and while a good poll will indicate a range of possibilities and not a single outcome, we dislike guesses. "The very idea of expressing things in probabilistic terms is to express uncertainty," Salvanto writes, "but too often everyone just wants to express things in quite the opposite fashion: as either yes or no." Of those yes-and- no matters, there are many. The author looks closely at polls of gun owners and other putatively single-issue voters to find many points of agreement ("background checks, to rule out criminals and terrorists, find nearly universal favor, in principle, because they take action against bad actors rather than the weapon") but also extremely broad areas of disagreement that often devolve into hatred. Conservatives agree on many points with liberals, but they'll tell you that liberals are evil all the same, and vice versa. Salvanto notes that polling indicates that those who are most committed to a political party are most likely to characterize their opponents as enemies, even as, say, conservatives step away from traditional Republican ideology to say that government should do more to help solve economic problems.
A revealing look at the numbers, how they're derived and interpreted, and how they sometimes
1 of 4 9/23/18, 11:03 PM
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/marklist.do?actionCmd=GET_MA...
fail us. Timely reading for the coming midterm elections.
Source Citation (MLA 8th Edition)
"Salvanto, Anthony: WHERE DID YOU GET THIS NUMBER?" Kirkus Reviews, 15 June 2018.
Book Review Index Plus, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A543008970 /GPS?u=schlager&sid=GPS&xid=0ebc272c. Accessed 24 Sept. 2018.
Gale Document Number: GALE|A543008970
2 of 4 9/23/18, 11:03 PM
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/marklist.do?actionCmd=GET_MA...
Where Did You Get This Number? A
Pollster's Guide to Making Sense of
the World
Publishers Weekly.
265.25 (June 18, 2018): p99. From Book Review Index Plus. COPYRIGHT 2018 PWxyz, LLC http://www.publishersweekly.com/
Full Text:
Where Did You Get This Number? A Pollster's Guide to Making Sense of the World Anthony Salvanto. Simon & Schuster, $26 (230p) ISBN 978-1-5011-7483-4
Salvanto, the director of elections and surveys for CBS News, does an admirable job of explaining how polls actually work and how polling data is compiled in this approachable overview. Salvanto plainly states polls aren't concerned about people as individuals; they are about trying to find out what people share (or don't share) with others concerning a particular topic. While he goes into great detail explaining how samples are put together and participants are contacted, the real meat of the book is in the details of particular polls and their findings. Salvanto takes readers beyond election day polling and into more complex realms like social issues--a survey he conducted in late 2017 revealed gun owners and nongun owners agree on more things than either group would expect. In a postmortem of the polling leading up to the 2016 presidential election, Salvanto reveals the key role "Reluctant Republicans"--those who didn't back Donald Trump in the polls, but ended up voting for him--played in determining the election. Salvanto's explanations and real-world examples add nuance to the numbers and graphs that fill the news. General interest readers and news junkies alike will come away with a greater appreciation of how polls and surveys are conducted, as well as a much clearer sense of what they mean. (Aug.)
Source Citation (MLA 8th Edition)
"Where Did You Get This Number? A Pollster's Guide to Making Sense of the World."
3 of 4 9/23/18, 11:03 PM
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/marklist.do?actionCmd=GET_MA...
Publishers Weekly, 18 June 2018, p. 99. Book Review Index Plus, http://link.galegroup.com /apps/doc/A544712472/GPS?u=schlager&sid=GPS&xid=3a75f2a9. Accessed 24 Sept. 2018.
Gale Document Number: GALE|A544712472
4 of 4 9/23/18, 11:03 PM
Behind the numbers: what can a pollster teach us about politics?
Jake Nevins
In his new book Where Did You Get This Number?, CBS News’ Anthony Salvanto breaks down polling for the layman
@jhnevins
Tue 21 Aug 2018 04.00 EDT
Last modified on Tue 21 Aug 2018 11.19 EDT
“Demand that your pollster not just predict the world, but explain it,” says Salvanto, CBS News’ director of elections and surveys.
Anthony Salvanto: ‘Demand that your pollster not just predict the world, but explain it.’ Photograph: Clarke L Smith/CBS
In the wake of the 2016 election, Donald Trump called polls unfavorable to him everything from “fake” to “phony”. The polls, of course, are neither, but that’s beside the point. Americans have become so collectively distrustful of polls, especially after they seemed to suggest Hillary Clinton would win the election, that the president’s attempts to discredit the practice entirely have gained real traction.
Ban pre-election polls? There’s no need to – they don’t work anyway
Martha Gill
Read more
That’s where Anthony Salvanto, director of elections and surveys for CBS News, comes in. In his new book Where Did You Get This Number? A Pollster’s Guide to Making Sense of the World, Salvanto begins on election night, the events of which surprised him less than they did most Americans. He proceeds, in digestible and timely fashion, to demystify the world of polling and pollsters. Salvanto spoke to the Guardian about how we ought to think of political campaigns, his strategy for the upcoming midterms and why you’re probably represented in a poll even if you’ve never been asked to take part in one.
What’s the biggest misconception about polling you set out to correct with this book?
I’d like people to read the whole thing to see all that a poll can tell you and demand that your pollster not just predict the world, but explain it. In 2016 polling, if you looked beyond the horse race, you saw that there were Republicans who were conservative and were hesitant about Donald Trump. But if they were to come back home, he would gain a lot of ground. And, in fact, they did. If you looked beyond the Democratic numbers for Clinton and saw that many of her voters had less enthusiasm, or that both candidates were personally disliked, you could see potential movement in the polls. I want to use that method in part as a way to say to everyone, “Demand that your pollster tell you all the things people are thinking and feeling and why,” and when you see that larger picture, you probably won’t be surprised by much.
You write that we ought to think of campaigns as “persuasion and marketing efforts, not races”. What do you mean by that?
In a horse race, the distance is run, never to come back again. Sometimes that analogy can mislead people because a campaign is a collective decision; in theory everyone could change their minds the day before the election. If we think of them as decision-making exercises among people we more easily come to grips with this idea of change and movement, because there isn’t a finite amount of time left. The other part, frankly, is that although aggregations of polls have their uses, and although I understand the temptation to see them as a shortcut, I want to push people to see beyond the top-line numbers. Knowing the leader, as I write in the book, is somewhat like thinking you know how a bottle of wine will taste just by knowing the price.
Sign up for Bookmarks: discover new books in our weekly email
Read more
In the aftermath of Trump’s victory, the practice of polling was so antagonized that people forgot that the national polls turned out quite accurately. Still, like you say, national polls didn’t decide the race.
Any time we’re faced with a lot of information, we understandably look for a way to shortcut it. “Well, if they’re winning nationally surely they must win.” I worry that some pollsters could be repeating that problem this year because the analogous situation now is the national generic ballot for Congress. Look, American politics doesn’t elect nationwide. If people only look at the national generic ballot, and if pollsters overemphasize the national generic ballot, we could be in for another situation where a number is accurate but still misleading.
The cover of Salvanto’s new book
Photograph: Simon & Schuster
You often get complaints from people who don’t see themselves reflected in a poll, or who’ve never been asked to participate in one. In the book, you explain how polls are constructed so that like-minded Americans are more represented than they think.
Polling has always had a problem in that it’s shrouded in mystery because you can’t watch it work. Even if I think a large cruise ship shouldn’t be able to float, I can look out my window and see it go by the Hudson river. But polling depends on this idea of sampling, which is hard to grasp because most of us learn from our day-to-day experiences. What we sometimes don’t realize is that we tend to socialize with people who are more like us than not. We’re often told: “No one I know agrees with that.” Well, you probably hang out with a lot of people like you. So what I try to do is get the reader to think about how you could be represented, and how all the people who aren’t like you could be as well.
Think about the popular movie that you don’t like, and yet it’s popular. Someone out there is seeing them. Think about the kinds of clothes that you would never wear but you see others wearing them. The fact is there are many different kinds of people out there, and the idea of representation means that even if we don’t call you, there are so many people like you, at least in the broad respect we measure in a poll. One of them will be in the poll and will answer the question just the same way you would have. I like to think there’s a power in that idea: that we share enough with enough other people that one of them can represent us. And those times you are called for a poll, you’ll represent all those people yourself.
But Americans, perhaps, are resentful of the idea of having been spoken for.
I think that’s a healthy thing. We all like the idea that we have a voice, because we all like the idea that we can make a difference. It can be off-putting to think that someone is speaking for us. That’s a big part of why I wrote the book. I certainly understand the skepticism, but I also try to point out the many ways that we in fact do think like pollsters, perhaps more often than we realize.
Would you have been inclined to write this book had Trump not won?
I decided to write the book almost immediately after the election. I’ve always wanted to try to explain how polling works to a general audience in a way that’s accessible. I really feel like we need to explain ourselves to a general audience. It’s not about the numbers; it’s the stories that the numbers tell. Having said all that, the 2016 election felt like a good jumping-off point because so many people, when they were asking me what happened to the polls what they were really asking is: do I understand the country as well as I thought? I thought the 2016 election became a really good jumping-off point because people were asking the right questions. Not just how were you off by one or two points, but they were asking about understanding people.
To the extent you’re willing to speculate, are Trump’s approval ratings any kind of bellwether for 2020? Or is that a fool’s errand in the way national polls often are?
I will happily say I don’t know what will happen in 2020. We know in historical terms that the president’s approval rating has been the most stable in his first year or two in office of anyone we’ve measured. So while other presidents have bounced up and down with events or with the economy, President Trump has stayed within just a few points of his rating. And there’s a reason for that: Democrats are almost universally opposed, and Republicans are almost entirely approving. So, with that, you have to ask yourself, “What does that measure really mean?” That’s one of the themes of the book. We can tell a story, which is that, over time, more folks who were considering supporting him at the beginning of his term have moved into the harder opposition. His supporters, in turn, have become even more steadfast. That hardening, at least with history as any guide, does suggest there’s very little room for movement.
UK readers can pre-order Where Did You Get This Number? at the Guardian Bookshop
Charlotte Talks: Who's Up, Who's Down, And Does It Matter? Making Sense Of Election Polls
By Chris Miller • Aug 22, 2018
Charlotte Talks on WFAE
Listen
Listening...
49:24
Wednesday, August 22, 2018
Election forecasters, from The New York Times and NPR to Five Thirty-Eight, had Hillary Clinton rolling to victory on Election Day 2016.
Credit The New York Times / Five Thirty-Eight
It's election season, which means there will be plenty of polls gauging whether a "blue wave" or Republican tide will hold Congress. Given that forecasts of a Hillary Clinton win in 2016 were off the mark, should we pay attention to polls for the midterms? Mike Collins talks with the head of elections and surveys for CBS News, Anthony Salvanto.
For the next two months, pollsters will be fanning out across the country in hopes of taking voters' pulses on the upcoming midterms.
Pollsters have taken their share of lumps since election night 2016, when Donald Trump defied the odds and cruised to an Electoral College victory. The pre-election polls and forecasts had Hillary Clinton easily winning.
How big of a grain of salt should we have on hand for the surveys for the midterms? Did the people whose forecasts were wrong in 2016 learn anything from that error?
Credit Simon and Schuster
Anthony Salvanto, who's in charge of CBS News' elections and surveys, takes readers behind the scenes of the 2016 election in his new book in hopes of getting a better understanding of polls.
GUEST
Anthony Salvanto, director of elections and surveys for CBS News; author of Where Did You Get This Number? A Pollster's Guide to Making Sense of the World (@SalvantoCBS)
Tags:
Charlotte Talks
Top News
To Trust Polls, Dig Deeper Into The Results
The sentiments underlying the 2016 results could be seen for months before, says the polling director for CBS News, and that’s true now for the 2018 race
To Trust Polls, Dig Deeper Into The Results
Illustration: Daniel Hertzberg
17 Comments
By Anthony Salvanto
Aug. 10, 2018 10:31 a.m. ET
We’ll soon be awash in poll numbers again as the midterm elections loom, and that’s a good thing. I plan to contribute quite a bit to that flood myself. But people are busy, and it’s understandably tempting to simply ask us pollsters “Who’s going to win?” or to glance at which candidate is leading at the moment. Doing that risks missing the real story of 2018—and some of the lessons learned in the 2016 election, too.
As the fall campaigns unfold, remember that neither a candidate’s polling percentage nor any other single number will give you the full picture—any more than a price tag really tells you how a bottle of wine will taste, or a stock price tells you everything about the health of a business. In 2018, pay less attention to the mashups of “the polls” or analogies of a race between thoroughbreds. Instead, look for thoughtful surveys that delve into why Americans feel as they do.
‘The dynamics that will decide the fall campaign are already visible. ’
The 2016 election surprised a lot of people, but it shouldn’t have. There were plenty of signs in the polling that Donald Trump could win, for those who looked past the top line. As the contest tightened in the closing week, there were historic levels of dislike for both candidates, which infused the campaign with uncertainty. In our surveys, many Republicans said they were hesitant to back Donald Trump at first, which was a big part of the reason he trailed Hillary Clinton. It wasn’t shocking when many of them came around to their party’s nominee at the end. Trump won very high percentages of late deciders, while many less-enthusiastic Democrats ultimately stayed home.
A good poll should quantify these dynamics for you; it should analyze an election campaign as a fluid set of possibilities. It should acknowledge that even when a number is accurate, it may not be useful. This year, a lot of pollsters are reporting what’s called the “generic ballot” for Congress, the party preference as measured nationwide, and most of them have the Democrats ahead. But Congress is won locally, seat by seat. So instead, watch the polls targeting the competitive districts that will really decide the House. This recalls a lesson of 2016, when national polls were actually very accurate, but turned out to be less relevant when the race was decided by a few states in the Electoral College. We need to make sure we watch—and poll—the right places.
The dynamics that will decide the fall campaign are already visible. Watch how much weight voters give to the economy in their decisions. Most say it’s good, and that normally favors the party in power; but other issues like immigration can spur far more division if they come to the forefront. Democrats’ fortunes still hinge on turning out people who don’t typically vote in midterms, so we’ll track efforts to persuade them. President Trump’s base is solidly with him, but his backers don’t see him as a typical Republican, so we’ll see if they’ll back his congressional candidates with as much vigor as they do Trump himself.
More Essays
Uncoupling Less Bitterly, With Some Help September 21, 2018
Trying to Hold on as California Burns September 21, 2018
So a Computer Walks Into a Bar… September 21, 2018
We Can’t Afford the Drugs That Could Cure Cancer September 20, 2018
We pollsters are used to healthy public skepticism about where we get all these numbers, even though long-term studies show they’ve generally maintained their accuracy. People suspect, correctly, that their fellow Americans have gotten harder for us to find and talk to. It does take more work and care for us to get a good read on what’s happening in a fast-changing country. But good pollsters innovate as technology changes, and we’ve never had more ways to talk to people than we do now.
Pollsters once just knocked on doors, then started making random telephone calls, then moved from land lines to calling mostly cellphones, because that’s what people use. After Americans got connected online, we moved interviews there to follow suit. Big data lets us dive deeper into the vote patterns than ever. The question is what we do with all this information.
This year, demand more from us pollsters. Don’t judge us simply by whether we can predict the world—judge us by whether we can explain it.
—Mr. Salvanto is Director of Elections and Surveys for CBS News. This essay is adapted from his book “Where Did You Get This Number? A Pollster’s Guide to Making Sense of the World,” which will be published by Simon & Schuster on Aug. 21.
Appeared in the August 11, 2018, print edition as 'To Get the Most Out of Polls, Delve Deeper.'
Most Popular Videos
[https://m.wsj.net/video/20180921/092118kavanaughford/092118kavanaughford_167x94.jpg]
How Ford’s Kavanaugh Allegation Came to Light
[https://m.wsj.net/video/20180921/092118ctinycar/092118ctinycar_167x94.jpg]
Big in China: Tiny Electric Cars
[https://m.wsj.net/video/20180920/092018latmurder2/092018latmurder2_167x94.jpg]
In Acapulco, 'Hell Is Overlapping With Paradise'
[https://m.wsj.net/video/20180921/092118crosby/092118crosby_167x94.jpg]
Art Star Njideka Akunyili Crosby's Language of Image-Making
[https://m.wsj.net/video/20180921/092018ksummit3/092018ksummit3_167x94.jpg]
North Korea Racks Up Diplomatic Points
Most Popular Articles
Used-Car Sales Boom as New Cars Get Too Pricey for Many
Used-Car Sales Boom as New Cars Get Too Pricey for Many
Yale Law Professor Amy Chua Rejects Charge She Coached Female Students on How to Dress for Kavanaugh
Yale Law Professor Amy Chua Rejects Charge She Coached Female Students on How to Dress for Kavanaugh
Your Browser Is the Most Important App You Have—Make Sure You Use the Right One
Your Browser Is the Most Important App You Have—Make Sure You Use the Right One
The Presumption of Guilt
Opinion: The Presumption of Guilt
The Rebellion at Justice
Opinion: The Rebellion at Justice
SHOW COMMENTS (17)
The Wall Street Journal