What tanked the Harris/Walz candidacy?

 The Harris/Walz candidacy faced significant challenges, primarily driven by the perception of their alignment with the psychology of force rather than the psychology of freedom. This shift in public perception was largely due to their support for policies that many viewed as coercive and dependent on government intervention, which undermined personal responsibility and individual liberties.

One of the critical factors that tanked their candidacy was the radical left's approach to governance, which emphasizes regulation and control over personal freedoms. This perspective fosters a mentality of dependency on the state, contrary to the principles of self-reliance and individual empowerment that resonate with many voters [1]. The perception that the Harris/Walz campaign embodied the ideals of socialism and leftism, which often include the promise of unearned entitlements and government overreach, alienated potential supporters who value freedom and personal responsibility [2].

Moreover, the psychological implications of adopting a victim mentality, as promoted by some leftist ideologies, were detrimental to their image. This approach encourages individuals to rely on external forces rather than fostering resilience and self-agency, which are crucial for a thriving society [3]. The public's growing awareness of the negative consequences of such ideologies—such as diminished character development and the erosion of community trust—played a significant role in the candidacy's decline [4].

Ultimately, the Harris/Walz candidacy was undermined by the perception that their policies reflected a coercive agenda that contradicted the values of freedom and personal responsibility, leading many voters to reject their vision for governance in favor of one that promotes individual liberty and self-determination [5][6].

Sources

1 Abnormal Psychology: An Integrative Approach 8th Edition by David H. Barlow, Vincent Mark Durand, and Stefan G. Hofmann

2 Liberalism is a Mental Disorder: Savage Solutions by Michael Savage, 2005 edition

3 The Personality Disorders Treatment Planner: Includes DSM-5 Updates (PracticePlanners) 2nd Edition by Neil R. Bockian, Julia C. Smith, and Arthur E. Jongsma Jr.

4 the Liberal Mind by Lyle H. Rossiter Jr., M.D.

5 Criminological and Forensic Psychology Third Edition by Helen Gavin

6 Man in the Trap by Elsworth F. Baker

In addition:

The decline of the Harris/Walz candidacy can be attributed to several interrelated factors, particularly their alignment with coercive policies and the resulting perception that these policies undermined personal responsibility and individual liberties.

One significant issue was the public's growing concern over government intervention in personal lives. Many voters felt that the Harris/Walz campaign promoted a vision of governance that relied heavily on state control, which is often associated with socialist and leftist ideologies. This perception fostered a belief that their policies would lead to increased dependency on the government, rather than empowering individuals to take charge of their own lives and responsibilities [1][2].

Furthermore, the campaign's advocacy for entitlements and welfare programs was viewed as encouraging a mentality of victimhood and reliance on government support. Such an approach can cultivate feelings of helplessness and diminish the drive for self-sufficiency among citizens. This shift towards dependency is detrimental not only to individual character development but also to the broader fabric of society, which thrives on the principles of personal responsibility and self-reliance [3][4].

Additionally, the radical left's commitment to social justice and equality often comes at the expense of established social norms and traditions. By rejecting these foundational aspects of society, the Harris/Walz candidacy alienated voters who value stability and continuity in their communities. The perception that their agenda threatened the values of marriage, family, and personal accountability further fueled opposition to their campaign [5][6].

In summary, the decline of the Harris/Walz candidacy was largely influenced by their alignment with coercive policies that promoted government overreach and dependency, ultimately undermining the principles of personal responsibility and individual liberties that resonate deeply with many voters. As a result, the campaign struggled to connect with those who seek a society that empowers individuals rather than one that relies on state intervention.

Sources:

1 Man in the Trap by Elsworth F. Baker

2 Abnormal Psychology: An Integrative Approach 8th Edition by David H. Barlow, Vincent Mark Durand, and Stefan G. Hofmann

3 Criminological and Forensic Psychology Third Edition by Helen Gavin

4 Liberalism is a Mental Disorder: Savage Solutions by Michael Savage, 2005 edition

5 The Personality Disorders Treatment Planner: Includes DSM-5 Updates (PracticePlanners) 2nd Edition by Neil R. Bockian, Julia C. Smith, and Arthur E. Jongsma Jr.

6 the Liberal Mind by Lyle H. Rossiter Jr., M.D.