Is Donald Trump really trying to get out of debating Kamala Harris again? Or is it the opposite?

On Thursday, it seemed like the dust had finally settled. “The debate about debates is over,” said Michael Tyler, the Harris campaign communications director, in a statement. “Donald Trump’s campaign accepted our proposal for three debates—two presidential and a vice presidential debate.”

“Assuming Donald Trump actually shows up on September 10 to debate Vice President Harris, then Governor Walz will see JD Vance on October 1 and the American people will have another opportunity to see the vice president and Donald Trump on the debate stage in October,” the Harris campaign continued.

But now, Trump’s team claims that the Democrat lied when she said the two sides reached a debate agreement. At the moment, there is only one confirmed debate between the presidential nominees, to be held September 10 by ABC News.

Nevertheless, the Trump campaign’s press secretary Karoline Leavitt told the Daily Caller Friday that Trump will be doing three debates and Vance will be doing two.

  • P00ptart@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Because outside of those religious texts, there’s 0 evidence to him existing at all. None.

    • CileTheSane
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Again, if you actually read my post, it specifically mentioned that religious texts are biased and therefore not credible, and the link mentions other historical documents that mention him existing.

      But you saw a post disagreeing with your religious beliefs so you plugged your ears and tuned it out rather than risk hearing something that might challenge your (for some reason) deeply held beliefs.

      We can agree Saint Nicholas was just some guy and a mythology was built up around him. We have a direct example of that happening. I don’t know why the idea that a similar thing could happen to some other guy is so dangerous to your world view.

      • P00ptart@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Saint Nicholas was a real, documented person, and by all accounts a good one at that. But there isn’t a single bit of credible, contemporary evidence that Jesus existed at all. There are inscriptions mentioning Jesus and where he came from but they were hundreds of years after the time when he would have existed.

        • CileTheSane
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Saint Nicholas was a real, documented person

          According to you there’s no “proof” of that, it’s just things people wrote down, and that’s not proof.

          There are inscriptions mentioning Jesus and where he came from but they were hundreds of years after the time when he would have existed.

          At least your admitting you bother to look at any evidence that disagrees with your religious beliefs. From my link earlier:

          In chronicling the burning of Rome in A.D. 64, Tacitus mentions that Emperor Nero falsely blamed “the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.”

      • Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        But you saw a post disagreeing with your religious beliefs so you plugged your ears

        No, it’s more that I’ve come across a truly obnoxious person, so I block them on Lemmy. Bye.