Here’s someone who gets it: Clinton’s Pledge on Debt Emerges as a Risible Claim, In Light of Her Platform.
The economic triad of rule of law, property rights, and sound money — which counter the nemeses of cronyism, interventionism, and redistribution — regained currency in the 1980s as supply-side economics and became indelibly known as the miracle of Reaganomics (and, in Britain, as Thatcherism).
Partisanship stand in your way? Dispel it through its nineteenth-century nomenclature, “the law of markets,” that reached its explicatory apogee in political economists J.B. Say and J.S. Mill. Exchange means exchange was its ethos and the inexhaustibility of demand its engine; rebutting with finality and prescience the latter-day Keynesian fallacy of demand deficiency, which served only as cover for political intrigue and aggrandizement under the guise of eliminating poverty.
Economic growth is the route to eliminating deficits and debt, the route to employment and prosperity (and immigration reform). Any other path is the wrong one and, unlike Hillary Clinton’s pledge not to grow the debt, no laughing matter.
There are many forms of insanity but political forms are the worst and largely incurable. If you are able to believe that she really can lower taxes, increase benefits, create more jobs and raise living standards all at the same time, then you are as politically deluded as it is possible to be.