In yesterday’s New York Times, Jon Chait got out his crystal ball:

Remember the Republican presidential debate a few months ago, when three candidates raised their hands to indicate they didn’t believe in evolution? Something just as laughable is likely to happen today, at the first Republican debate on the economy. Every candidate will probably embrace the myth that cutting taxes increases government revenues. At the very least, no one will denounce it as a falsehood.

As predicted, two candidates stepped up to the plate:

SEN. BROWNBACK: I’ve put forward a proposal of an optional flat tax, and putting that on the table, saying, okay, you can pick this. If you want to stay in the code, go ahead, God bless you, but here’s an optional flat tax. Sixteen countries around the world have gone to the flat tax. Nobody’s gone back away from it, because it creates growth, it creates growth in the economy, and it increases revenue for the government…

GIULIANI: I cut taxes 23 times when I was mayor of New York City. I believe in tax cuts. I believe in being a supply-sider. I cut the income tax — I think it was 24 percent. We got 42 percent more revenues.

I see in The Wall Street Journal this morning an editorial that says: Can we take the good news that the tax cuts have actually worked to produce about $500 billion in additional revenue no one ever thought was possible?

Giuliani (here and here), Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, and John McCain have previously made similar claims during the campaign in an effort to win over economic conservatives. Any chance a reporter or debate moderator might ask the candidates why they’re endorsing a theory that even Bush administration economists reject? Anyone?