Ranvier

This isn't something that gets done like after a few hours or a day or something. It takes quite some time to get through cooling protocols, warming again, complete all the testing, geting everything stable. Talking like a week plus at the quickest. And cranial nerve reflexes are just one thing of many different tests done. And to boot, it sounds like from the article they knew he had cranial nerve reflexes, which anyone halfway competent should know, means there is certainly not brain death. Really want to know what this hospital was doing that they messed up so badly.

Really want to know exactly who declared brain death? For instance in the article the family talks about seeing eye movements and being told they're "just reflexes."Yeah that may be, but reflexes involving the eyes are cranial nerve reflexes, they go through the brain. There can't be brain death if they are there. That's a brain function. Testing to make sure all cranial nerve reflexes are absent (gag, apnea, vestibular, etc) is one of the basic pieces of brain death testing.

There's a lot of confusion in popular media between brain death and persistent vegetative state. In a persistent vegetative state there's still many brain functions going, but troubles maintaining consciousness. Brain death testing when properly done there is extensive testing done by a neurologist or someone with a similar background to show no brain function at all remains before it can be declared brain death, no matter how basic, even the simplest of brain reflexes. It's not just one test but a whole series of testing with different modalities.

Would really like to know what happened here to cause such a colossal mess. Or nearly did, the doctors stopped before doing anything at least.

Polling errors are not predictable beforehand. If they were, we wouldn't have polling errors. In 2022 for instance there was polling error in favor of democrats not against (or at least too much emphasis on polls with errors in Republican favor).

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/31/us/politics/polling-election-2022-red-wave.html

We can't know the electorate beforehand, so poll weighting and deciding who is a likely voter is always going to involve some guesswork. So the opposite of what you say is true as well, if there is a small polling error that overstates Trump's support it would have Kamala sweeping every swing state.

But the polls show a close election, all we can do is do our best to do things that help her win. Like voting early to make sure our vote gets in no matter what, encouraging people we know to register and vote, volunteering, canvassing, donating, etc.

Also important to know, if democrats take back the house, Johnson would no longer be speaker at the time the presidential election is certified. It's the next congress, not the current one, that will certify the vote. New congress is seated on January 3rd 2025, and the presidential election certification is on January 6th 2025.

"The charges include market manipulation, conspiracy to commit money laundering, and wire fraud, which can lead to sentences of up to 20 years"

SEC also has a press release

https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024-166

I hate these hyperbolic headlines describing some tiny poll movement in a single poll well within the margin of error, describing it a some definitive clear change in support.

Here's the times sienna poll today for instance, another high quality pollster, where she went from tied to now 3% ahead and is leading for the first time in that poll since July.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4921203-kamala-harris-donald-trump-national-new-york-times-poll/

If the race is truly a 3 point gap right now, and the margin of error is plus or minus 4 percent, you're going to see polls with her everywhere from one behind to 7 ahead. It's a bad idea to hyper scrutinize or draw big conclusions from tiny changes in one poll.

This is why we so desperately need the voting rights act back. It used to be that changes like this required pre clearance before taking effect, and any challenges be worked out before hand.

Another terrible supreme court decision courtesy conservatives/Republicans who don't respect the right to vote.

So the model image you posted above there says it's more likely that Trump wins the election than it is flipping two heads in a row while flipping a coin. This is saying it's less likely for Trump to win than Hillary to win, but something that could fairly easily happen still. These aren't poll numbers, where 70-30 would be a massive blow out. This is a 30% chance of winning for Trump, closer to a coin flip than a sure thing.

A lot of other models were saying something ridiculous like Clinton had 95% chance to win or something. Nate Silver's model seems better than others based on this, if anything.

The "pro family" party everyone. Don't forget their other greatest hits like, kidnapping children of immigrants and not keeping records of who they were kidnapping them from, making reuniting them with their families ever again difficult to impossible.

Absolutely despicable. How do these people sleep at night?

Would love an electric hatch back. Wish they'd bring more of them to the US.

This is also misleading because he has pension funds. Those pensions certainly have the money invested. They're acting like the guy has no retirement plan.