I think I’ve heard a dog not barking in the current presidential campaign. See if you agree.

This country cries out for economic growth. For dynamism. For opportunity. For liberalization. We are stagnating, and we are accepting a “new normal” of widespread unemployment, staggering debt, and shrunken hopes.

There is also the question of “entitlements”: What’re we gonna do? This has been a dominant question for years.

Yet in the current campaign, I don’t hear much talk about economics. Are the candidates airing plans and ideas? Other issues are important, of course: immigration and Iran, to name two. But …

You may remember that, in 2012, Herman Cain had a charming plan that he called “9-9-9.” In opposition to the plan, our Kevin Williamson responded, “Nein, nein, nein!” Jon Huntsman said that, when he first heard about 9-9-9, he thought it was the price of a pizza. (Cain had been CEO of Godfather’s Pizza.) The candidate, Cain, took palpable offense to this.

Anyway, enough of my Memory Lane. I don’t hear much talk of economics and entitlements in the current cycle. I am thinking in particular of the Republican side. Is that because the candidates agree on the basics?

The Democratic side, I hardly bother with. Their position is that nothing — nothing — must be changed from Lyndon Johnson, the 1960s, and the (Un-) Great Society. Everything must be frozen, forever.

It’s odd that Republican reformers and liberalizers are called “conservatives” while the Democrats, who are immovable status-quoers, are called “liberals” or “progressives.”

Could be I’m wrong — could be there’s more economic discussion than I’ve been aware of. But I offer a thought, for a Friday morning.