Here's an example. How could "economical illiteracy" be "fundamental" to "liberalism"? What are you actually talking about?
Perhaps you're trying to stereotype registered Democrat voters, disparaging them as know-nothings when it comes to economics. Is that it? Is that likely to lead to a productive conversation, do you think? It's hard to even know where to start, when you lead with something like that.
Granted it's hard to talk about specifics without defining specifics. Yet, it's tedious to have to re-invest the wheel in every conversation. Especially if you actually understand the point being made and your only objection is that it's isn't specific enough or that's it's too broad.
An example of Democrats not seeming to consider economic principles and consequences... Everyone now seems to think the educational system was great when the Boomers went to college but that it's too expensive now.
The problem is that Democrats didn't like the system when the Boomers went to college. Even though it was affordable either by paying outright or for some it required a Pell Grant or maybe a small loan or some work on the side or whatever.
They wanted "everyone" to go to college even though most people who really wanted to, could.
So they started the current expanded loan guarantee program. Tuitions when up of course. Some who couldn't really afford the loans, defaulted, some took out too much "easy money", etc. It was all predictable from the beginning.
Now Democrats complain that tuition is too expensive. To a degree it is and to a degree it's just inflation, just like with everything else but they helped to make it that way.
Another, similar, example. People who really want to buy a house generally find a way. It isn't easy for anyone. Now people talk about how affordable it was to buy a house for Boomers (it wasn't). Democrats wanted to make it easier for everyone to afford a house so they guaranteed the sub-prime mortgage lenders with little oversight.
Predictably too many people got loans that they couldn't afford and eventually the industry had to be bailed out to protect the stability of the whole financial system which would have effected you, me and everyone else.
The people who complained loudest at the bailout were the same people who supported the polices that created the problem in the first place.
My point is that it's great to have empathy, to have a "heart" but you also have to use your brain and in this case it's just about basic economics. This is all predictable.
Inflation is too many dollars chasing too few goods. During Covid the government basically shut down production (too few goods) and handed out stimulus checks whether you were out of work or not (too many dollars) . It passed PPP which was a paycheck protection plan that kept employees on the payroll for longer than employers could have afforded otherwise. Both were rushed programs IMO.
Now Democrats are complaining the "the rich" had PPP loans forgiven (which was the idea of the program and benefited the employee, not the employer) as a justification to forgive student loans?
None of it makes any sense, economically it was all predictable and yet the government is "surprised" that we have inflation?
It's not a matter of Republicans being smarter than Democrats (and I'm not a Republican) but it's that politically the more liberal the party, individual, policy is, the less it seems grounded in sound economics.
There is also a lot of cross characterizing of anyone that mentions anything about sound financial policy is somehow "conservative in a social sense", a Trump Republican with all the baggage that entails whereas probably half the country is actually centrist, doesn't like Trump and his carnage but is financially responsible whether it's Republican over-spending or Democratic over-spending.
The Achilles Heel of the Democratic Party is economics and always has been. That's not to say that it's a bad party but that is their weakness. Most people in the party (as opposed to actual Democratic voters) haven't worked in the private section, don't understand, care or think about the economic repercussion.