Emerging Consensus Among Economists: McCain Is the "Least Horrible" Candidate

The Wall Street Journal's latest Economic Forecasting Survey found 75% of responding economists favoring John McCain over Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama when it comes to responsible fiscal policy.

But the results don't amount to an unqualified endorsement.

Almost half of the economists in the latest Wall Street Journal forecasting survey decided against answering a question on which presidential candidate offers the most responsible fiscal policies. However, Sen. John McCain was the clear favorite of those who answered the question. Twenty-one economists of 75% of the respondents chose the Republican contender. However, they weren’t exactly enthusiastic. “His [policies] are the least horrible,” said James F. Smith of Western Carolina University and Parsec Financial Management.

McCain's support of the likely feckless gas tax holiday didn't win him any points among the group.  But it didn't hurt him enough to cast him down with the others.

“The gas price break scheme is stupid,” said Mark Nielson of MacroEcon Global Advisors. “However we don’t trust Clinton. Obama is an unknown entity, but should he favor vast social programs he has championed as a young man we cannot assume he will be fiscally responsible.”

Is it really a lack of trust in Clinton that's most worrisome, though?  I can't argue with the contention that she's untrustworthy, but if we do take her at her word, she'd re-inflict Jimmy Carter's disastrous "windfall profit tax" on the oil sector, kibosh the pro-growth investment income tax cuts, unwind her husband's free trade accords, and socialize healthcare, an industry that accounts for 16% of GDP.

Those aren't all strictly fiscal, but they certainly carry massive economic consequences.

In light of her stated policy intentions, I'd find Clinton a lot scarier if she weren't so frequently truth-challenged.