AOC is incompetent and is not fit to serve in the US government

AOC has been notorious for making up statistics and has demonstrated time and time again that she does not understand US economics.

She has a role to play by representing the free stuff voter coalition that wants a big authoritarian government to take wealth from productive people and give it to unproductive people to equalize the feels.

What statistics did she make up?

Consverative here... Trump has lied sometimes and doesn't make someone "unfit" whatever your definition is of it

Has one mostly true statement, everything else is false or pants in fire-https://www.politifact.com/personalities/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/statements/by/

"Sometimes"?

"More often than not".

"Rarely if ever tells the truth..."

"Is generally prone to self aggrandizement, or hyperbole when raw statistics are requested..."

He lies so frequently that I would consider "Sometimes..." to be a lie in relation to how frequently he lies.

Prove it

He lies when it doesn't really matter... it's more of an exaggeration, which everyone does, heck the pastor of my church would tell stories in his sermons when I was actually present in the story that he told, and he would exaggerate the story differently every time he told it.  I think he tried to make it funnier, this did not make him a bad person.  For instance, Trump said the Mueller investigation cost $45 million, when it was really estimated at $25 million, he didn't have the numbers right in his face at the time... Does it really make a difference?  Not to the government because Gov money for some reason doesn't seem real to the people who make the budgets.  They really don't know the value of a dollar.

He lied about his turnout at inauguration, who cares.  He has been known to lie about golf, I don't know a person who doesn't.  There are many instances where he has lied.  But none will ever amount to the lie that Hilary told the next of kin, to their face, about Benghazi. 

And Fact check is a bunch of crap, it's just a bunch of red lines on subjective things, no one really reads them, they just see how many things are crossed out in speeches and writings on a piece of paper without seeing what was apparently lied about.  Just to hold it up and see all of the adjustments that were made overall. Which I guess is the same thing that Trump does with his exaggerations.  But he is not the news.

How many times out of how many times of speech do you require as 'proof?

I can open with his lie about windmills causing cancer, the Puerto Rico aid relief, and how successful he claims the summits with Kim would be.

From there, we can go to his off the cuff remarks (aka lies) regarding immigration stats, then I supposed we could finish up with some interesting tales about "beautiful clean coal".

Oh, does his lies pre-office count?  I mean, if you look at the contract he had with voters, some of the stuff he claimed would be his first 100 days hasn't even been mentioned yet.

But, again, the benchmark for what you consider to be proven is yours.  Please tell me what criteria meet that he lies, much much much more often than he tells the truth.

So far no evidence

Do you even know what evidence is?

Just asking not defending.

no, what he said was a statement no evidence

"I do not know what evidence is". 

What evidence did he present?

I asked the question.

You said:

So basically no you don't know what evidence is.

https://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ ?

I am fucking done with you shitty little games that you play when you HAVE NO ARGUMENTS WHAT SO EVER. You add nothing good to this stop squeaking until you have something good to say

I wouldn't trust that. Trumps saying-"The United Kingdom is "our largest (trading) partner." Is rated false,which makes no sense since he said PARTNERS not including wholesome trades.

As well as-""There has never been, ever before, an administration that’s been so open and transparent."

Thats an opinion

I mean.. two cherry picked and very generous interpretations do not make an entire website false

If opinions are now the standard for the concrete definition of a lie, then there are an infinite amount of lies you could gather from anyone not reading off of a scripted teleprompter.

No, how do you define the measurements of transparency.

Im not going through the whole website. Those situations show that the WEBSITE cherry picks

this conversation is over with you, no intelligence,0 iq.

Because I am asking for your criteria of evidence.

How would you like your debunking laid out?

Quote and citation?

C'mon big-mouth.  I am willing to play your silly game, lets hear the rules.

so far no evidence

Of course you don't need to go through an entire website to decide whether it should be trusted. However, picking out a few cases where you personally disagree with the assessments does not invalidate the website as a whole.

Please explain how to play your game.

I say Trump lies.

you say "nu-uh"

I say, Trump said windmills cause cancer.

That is a lie.

I say Trump over inflated how much aid has actually gone to Puerto Rico (a lie), you say "no evidence"

That, so far, is 2 lies.

That fulfills my end of the bargain (and proves my point) until such time as you come around and explain the rules of your game.

How is the statement "they say noise causes cancer" a lie?

Do you have evidence that THEY did not say it?

That wasn't his quote.  Its what he inferred, but not what he said.  

Secondly, its not my place to do opposition research to an unresearched claim.  That 'noise' whatever that means, might cause cancer is an interesting suggestion.  I look forward to what you might have to say about it.  In the mean time, we can turn to thousands upon millions of examples of high decibel occupations in which the primary injury while on the work site is unsurprisingly premature hearing loss.  Shall I site OSHA, or are you done?