Donald Trump is so mad, it seems he’s about to chicken out of debating Kamala Harris.

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.

    • @ripcord
      26•1 month ago

      The solution to Bad is not Worse

        • @ripcord
          6•1 month ago

          No joke! All serious! And gloom!

            • @P00ptart
              2•1 month ago

              At least we know Donald exists.

              • @[email protected]English
                -11•1 month ago

                Are you seriously taking a common expression of exasperation to push some very specious theories about whether that man actually existed? The cult leader 2000 years ago most definitely fucking did, any other conjecture is Elvis Presley is alive conspiracy horseshit people like you pretend to abhore.

                • @P00ptart
                  1•1 month ago

                  You really trying to advocate that Jesus Christ existed? Despite no proof at all? Might as well try to advocate that Deadpool is real.

                  • @[email protected]
                    -1•1 month ago

                    What would you accept as proof?

                    https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

                    “These are all Christian and are obviously and understandably biased in what they report, and have to be evaluated very critically indeed to establish any historically reliable information,” Ehrman says. “But their central claims about Jesus as a historical figure—a Jew, with followers, executed on orders of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius—are borne out by later sources with a completely different set of biases.”

                    Or are you arguing there is no proof anyone existed prior to the 1800s? Oh sure there are documents, but that’s not proof.

                  • @[email protected]English
                    -2•1 month ago

                    No proof? I can’t be bothered with this idiocy. Read a fucking book about ancient Rome around 33 AD.