Political science will have to explain how polsonarianism managed and managed the loyalty of a large swath of right-wing voters

The Governor of Minas Gerais, Romeo Zema de Novo, decided to make an assessment of the presidential elections (as is known, the leader of Minas Gerais plans to run for the presidency in 2026).

According to “Estadão”, Zema said that people were “saddened” by President Jair Bolsonaro’s speeches, especially during the acute phase of the pandemic. More than he lost to candidate Lula, President Bolsonaro lost to himself, because of the way he made contacts.

In an interview with Radio Super FM, the director of Minas Gerais stressed: “The president himself, who has good intentions, often in his speeches ends up being unhappy. (…) During the pandemic, the federal government’s communications left much to be desired “When you’re dealing with something you don’t know, it’s good that you don’t take it for granted. You’re underestimating something that he’s upset about, and it ends up having a negative reflection.”

Zima hits and misses? It seems so. Indeed, Bolsonaro has left thousands, perhaps millions, “heartbroken” (apparently insensitive to the pain of others). But his big voice suggests that there is some kind of “victory” in his defeat, as strange as it sounds. In addition, he lost to Lula da Silva, not to himself. The Labor candidate managed to “sell” Hope to a few more people than the Labor candidate.

Just as Bolsonaro, of Hizb ut-Tahrir, lost, and Lula da Silva, of the Workers’ Party, won, assessments point to the “fragileness” of the right-wing leader and the “strength” of the left-wing candidate.

In fact, as Lula da Silva won, there is not much to argue about the numbers. After all, a victory, even with one vote, is a victory. Over time, for example, the result is forgotten.

But the numbers, for both Lula da Silva and Bolsonaro, are telling and saying more than they seem to suggest.

First, as repeated in all the comments, Lula da Silva won only in the Northeast, and with an expressive front: 69.34% versus 30.66%. A real massacre.

Secondly, Bolsonaro was appointed as an agent of backwardness, winning in the most developed and modern areas of the country. In the Southeast, it had 54.26% and Lula da Silva 45.74%. In the south, the Workers’ Party got 38.16% and Bolsonaro 61.84%. In the north, a less developed region, Bolsonaro also won 51.03% – Lula got 48.97% of the vote.

In total, Lula da Silva received 60,345,999 votes (50.90%) and Bolsonaro won with 58,206,354 votes (49.10%). The difference was very small: 2,139,645 votes.

The victory of the PT candidate hides, as it were, the electoral power of Bolsonaro, that is, from the right.

No one should underestimate Lula da Silva’s triumph – rather an expressionist one. Especially since he was arrested and is still topping. But anyone who wants to understand Brazilian politics in the future should carefully examine the vote for the right-wing candidate – nearly 60 million votes.

Certainly, over the next few years, political scientists and sociologists will carefully scrutinize voters “for Bolsonaro”. They will have to explain with careful analysis – of a scientific nature – who the president’s constituents are. We have some of the best political scientists in the world, who will certainly study right-wing (and) voters, showing what is public and what is private, as well as the differences. It is possible that what appears as a “unity”, being of the right, can “hide” other things, such as the voters of the center who, by not finding an alternative against Lula da Silva, are associated with polsonarianism. Whoever wants to ‘take over’ a piece of that electorate – be it Labor or some other party – will first need to understand it well. Perhaps it is possible to suggest that these are ‘electors’, not ‘electors’. The variety tends to be wider than you might think.

How the right managed, so to speak, to “mold” a largely radical – and therefore loyal – electorate is one of the mysteries of the 2022 election.

Do these voters belong to the rich and middle classes? Everything points to yes. But not all. It is entirely possible that evangelical leaders, working methodically and systematically, played a major role in persuading voters who generally vote on the whim of campaigns, decided to follow Bolsonaro, identifying firmly with the president.

Because so many voters have “identified” with Bolsonaro, and the feeling that the president represents them, is one of the “secrets” of this year’s race. The alliance between the president and the huge number of voters will have to be broken up, seriously and with less ideological tension, from now on. Responsible political scientists – open to the “new” and the difficulties of assimilating it – have excellent material to examine.

Identification suggests that the right-wing electorate is highly organized — and rebellious — and that, most likely, he won’t change his mind in the next presidential election. There are those who believe that, given the defeat and lack of commitment, at least not yet, to the coup plotting appeals to right-wing voters, Bolsonaro will not cement himself as the leader of the radical voters.

Thus, the space will open for a center-right candidate, such as the conservatives Ronaldo Cayado (Uniao Brasil), from Goiás, and Romeo Zema. Goiano and Mineiro both have more profiles of statesmen and managers than Bolsonaro. But it remains to be seen whether right-wing voters, who have become radicalized, will go along with them, leaving aside Bolsonaro or one of his patrons, such as Tarcisio de Freitas.

From the point of view of this moment at least, the electorate continues to demand a right-wing name, a radical name, not a moderate right-wing name. But can it change? absolutely yes. Depending on the administration of Lula da Silva, which imposes enormous tasks on itself – and which can wear it out quickly -, the right will come in full force. It remains to be seen whether he will be with a moderate candidate, closer to the center and collectivist, or with an extremist candidate, a la Bolsonaro.

Returning to Romeo Zima’s analysis: Carlos Drummond de Andrade and Guimarães Rosa’s land manager does not ask himself a crucial question: How can a candidate with so much wear and tear – such as delays in obtaining a vaccine against Covid-19 – be able to obtain such The extraordinary vote? And more: How did you manage to win over such a loyal and radical electorate? Some assume that such voters are “imaginary”. But it’s worth asking: Is it really possible that nearly 60 million Brazilians could be “delirious” by supporting Bolsonaro? It is possible that this “component” is taken into account, but it does not fully explain the massive and convincing support.

The “identity” between Bolsonaro and his constituents – certainly of the right, but also, in part, of the center (the center did not remain with only Lula) – an enthusiastic, possibly fanatical constituency (hence the idea of ​​delirium, which, in and of itself, is incorrect; it is insufficient merely to explain the phenomenon), it is a phenomenon which, I insist, should galvanize the attention of political scientists (I will include sociologists and anthropologists) in years to come.

In 2026, if voters remain extreme, on the right, the possibility of a Bolsonaro comeback is not far off. Bolsonaro or another right-wing candidate. It remains to be seen if another right-wing name will be relevant to voters who, without hesitation, present themselves as right-wingers.

Pragmatic and rationalist Ronaldo Chiado, given his personal physique and ideological firmness – a doctor, a man of science – is perhaps the candidate for president who can appeal to right- and center-wing voters alike.

Romeo Zema seems “nice” to me, with his highly technical speech, in the manner of a coach. He doesn’t seem to sit well with radical voters.

Tarcísio de Freitas, the elected governor of São Paulo, the rural state, counts on Bolsonaro’s game. But he does not look like a patriotic politician. It may be “good” for Sao Paulo, but it may not be palatable to Brazil. However, his relative moderation and “working” style could please millions of voters. At the moment, are you a “candidate” to replace Bolsonaro? At the moment, he has a great task ahead of him: to run a state, São Paulo, which is, in practice, one of the richest “countries” in Latin America. Managing the land of the poets Mario de Andrade and Regis Bonvicino is the same as managing a country. In other words, there is no better “training” for anyone planning to run Brazil.