Lula or Bolsonaro: May Brazil be the Winner

Although smaller than predicted by the polls, the advantage of the socialist candidate over the President anticipates a very uncertain runoff election in Brazil. Who has the key to elect the next president of Latin America’s most important country?

Illustration: Erick Retana

By Fabiola Chambi 

The result of the presidential election held in South America’s giant, with a population of more than 214 million people, became the center of media attention. Indeed, on Sunday, October 3rd, former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, of the PT (the Workers’ Party), came in first place with 48.4% of the votes against President Jair Bolsonaro, of the PL (Liberal Party), who got 43.2% of the votes. This margin, closer than expected, has increased anxiety levels in Brazilian streets. An imaginary stopwatch is counting down to October 30th, the date of the runoff and the day in which the President for the next four years will be elected. 

Everyone, experts and amateurs, is weighing in about the future of the region’s most decisive country. But citizens’ perceptions better represent the reality of a campaign that was based on things from their past that candidates eagerly wanted to erase, and which has been characterized by a confrontation of insults instead of proposals. For instance, Caio de Paula Bastos, a young professional who lives in Rio de Janeiro, believes that “there is a lot of polarization, this country is divided and what may happen is very uncertain. I fear that the losing side will not accept the results and that something similar to what happened in the United States might occur.”   

The last statement is not far-fetched at all, since Bolsonaro has repeatedly addressed it recently, although the topic did not gain much attention in recent weeks. On the other hand, results show that nothing has been said and done. What is at stake in Brazil is more than a return to the left or a continuity of the right, but the prevalence of democracy and institutionality. A complex governability?

The scenario deriving from the vote cast on Sunday, October 2nd, makes it more difficult for Lula da Silva than for Bolsonaro, since Congress will have a majority of the right. The numbers, according to analyst and political marketing expert Marco Bastos, leave something to reflect about both contenders: Lula is bigger than the left because he prevailed in the election, but in the Chamber of Representatives, leftist parties failed to attain 30% of the seats. Whereas it became clear that Bolsonarismo is a force, not a trend, made up of three solid bases: militarism, religious conservatism and an alliance with regional oligarchies. 

Polls failed in the ample difference they had projected in favor of Lula. That is why the right-wing candidate considered his votes as a huge victory.

Although Bolsonaro’s government has been scrutinized for its approach to international politics, the economy and the pandemic (a small flu or a “gripezinha” –in his own words–), the support he got in this first round us undoubtable, and makes way for some serious questions. “People vote with their pockets and their hearts, with both. Bolsonarismo is a phenomenon of robust political identities (…) Bolsonaro is like a dad of the 50’s, he is not politically correct at all and he curses, but he has come to reinstate a lost hierarchy,” Bastos explains.  

Support for Bolsonaro can also be interpreted as the “shame-faced vote”, says Juliana A. F. Gonçalves, a researcher of the Observatorio de Reformas Politicas en America Latina at Instituto de Investigaciones Juridicas (UNAM). She asserts that this phenomenon takes place amongst “citizens who silently support this ideological political project.”

Moreover, Lula was seen more excited and convinced that he’ll return to power, claiming that “it is only a matter of time” because “I have thirty more days to campaign, and I love campaigning.”

Campaigns: Now What? 

With the clock ticking, both parties’ strategies must be able to consolidate enough  support to win in the ballot.

“The votes gained by Lula and Bolsonaro are fixed, we need to consider that the electorate’s abstention rate was the highest ever, with 20.9%, this means that almost 32 million Brazilians missed out on voting. They are indecisive or just don’t believe in the current political program, therefore, campaigns should focus on them,” Gonçalves remarks.

But there are two key names in this scenario: Simone Tebet and Ciro Gomes, the other candidates that came in third and fourth place with 4.2% and 3% of the votes, respectively. That coveted 7.2% of the centrist vote could tip the scale towards the presidency, but, for what we’ve seen this far, both of them are more programmatically near Lula’s party. In fact, both candidates confirmed their support to the former President, whether voters follow them or not remains unclear. In other words, it is uncertain if their votes can be endorsed.  

Despite the significant distance with the first and second place, Simone Tebet, a senator of the MDB  (Movimiento Democratico Brasilero), has a serious proposal which merges elements of the left and right and emphasizes on democratic institutionality. That sets her apart from Bolsonaro, even though she has also criticized Lula for the environment of corruption that has surrounded him. 

Gomes, who was a Minister of the Lula administration, distanced himself from him in 2018 when the former President was charged and arrested for corruption. Yet the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil annulled the ruling afterwards. Throughout the campaign of the first round, he was critical of Lula and Bolsonaro, but for the runoff, he is ready to support the “closest” ideological position. 

For Flavia Mantovani –a famous journalist at Folha de Sao Paulo–, the trends indicate that most votes will be endorsed to Lula, but there are no certainties. “It is very difficult for Bolsonaro,” she says, “because his mission is to convince Lula’s voters to change their vote; the runoff gives him thirty days of electoral race, and in recent years, Brazilian politics have been marked by attacks between both parties.” Thus the alternative must be considered. “There is huge resistance to the PT; and since Bolsonaro is President the government machinery is in his favor. Also, I believe there is room for dramatic surprises,” Mantovani adds.

On the other hand, campaigns should not disregard the evangelical vote, which amounts to 31% of the population: almost 70 million people. Out of those, half are with President Bolsonaro and 32% are with Lula, as reported by France 24. In 2018, this support benefited the leader of the PL and this time around, it seems that he is going to play that card again. It is not surprising that Bolsonaro gave more prominence to his wife, Michelle Bolsonaro –a self-proclaimed evangelist–, and her image is set to continue rising. 

However, the evangelical vote must be correctly read because it has many varieties, as political analyst Bastos explains. “Evangelicals are not just one thing, some groups have a more conservative view of Christianity, others do not. Bolsonaro’s support is played in this scenario.”

The fact that religion has a relevant role in politics nowadays can not be set aside. “It is a topic that must not be neglected because the country is at risk of being ruled by Christian fundamentalism,” Gonçalves asserts.

There is no certain prediction for this electoral campaign, especially when surveys mistakenly read the electorate for the first round. Or as Mexican consultant, Roy Campos, would say: “Polls are good for many things except for predicting the winner.”

The 156 million people who voted in the first round must now decide between highly-antagonistic and not-very-convincing proposals, amidst an environment of distrust towards the results (at least from one of the sides). For example, Rio native Caio de Paula Bastos, admits that his vote was not for Lula nor Bolsonaro, and that he has not made up his mind about his vote in the runoff. Certainties —at least for citizens— are distant from that vision of a prosperous country with economic well-being and democratic health in which they wish to live. 

Artículos relacionadosMás del autor

DEJA UNA RESPUESTA

Por favor ingrese su comentario!
Por favor ingrese su nombre aquí