>The Nation's circulation is 123,000?! (according to
>the audit bureau statement in the 10/8 issue). That's
>very impressive. I had no idea it was that high; I
>always thought it was in the mid-90s. The editors
>must be doing something right.
It bottomed out at the low 80s in the early Clinton years, then started rising, and then really started rising after W's coronation.
Doug