|
— by Paulo Abrão, executive director of the Washington Brazil Office With six days to go before the vote, Brazil’s presidential election remains open, but the room for movement is narrowing. The Quaest poll released yesterday placed Lula at 39% and Flávio Bolsonaro at 34% in the first round, while the two are tied at 42% in a potential runoff on October 25. More important than the overall fluctuation is the movement within the electorate: undecided voters fell from 10% to 5%; Lula gained among women, Catholics, and independents; and polarization deepened. Among women, 47% say they fear the Bolsonaro family returning to power more than 37% fear Lula remaining in office. Strategic voting, rejection, and fear, therefore, enter the final week as possible forces concentrating the vote. Strategic voting, rejection, and turnout
The contest is no longer only about persuading those who have not yet decided how they will vote, but also about ensuring that each side’s own voters actually turn out. Lula and Flávio both register rejection rates above 50% under Quaest’s methodology, and O Globo has highlighted the risk of higher abstention in a campaign perceived as generating limited enthusiasm. In 2022, more than 32 million voters did not cast a ballot. In a close election, territorial mobilization and willingness to vote may matter as much as persuasion. However, there is no solid basis for saying which side would be more affected by lower turnout. Lula’s presidential offensive
The government has entered the final stretch with measures carrying strong social and electoral impact: restrictions on betting platforms, debt renegotiation programs, and increases in social benefits. Historically, the Workers’ Party has won every presidential election it contested while occupying the Planalto Palace in 2006, 2010, and 2014. That does not predict the outcome in 2026. Still, it helps explain why the campaign is seeking to associate Lula with the capacity to act as president and to reconnect with an identity rooted in trade unionism, labor, and social policies. Quaest itself recorded gains for the president among women, Catholics, and lower-income voters after this renewed offensive. Mobilization and social media
The campaign is taking place in an environment where no one can precisely measure the electoral impact of WhatsApp, Instagram, TikTok, or AI-generated content. Meta temporarily suspended Lula’s Facebook advertising account ten days before the vote and restored it later the same day, without publicly explaining the reason. The episode does not prove partisan interference by the platform, but it shows how private decisions by technology companies can take on political significance. Flávio, meanwhile, confirmed that he will attend the TV Globo debate this week even if Lula does not, and has begun publicly challenging him to appear. Corruption will remain central
Lula has intensified efforts to associate Flávio with Banco Master and Daniel Vorcaro. Flávio continues to link Lula, his inner circle, and the Workers’ Party to investigations and scandals. With electorates already strongly consolidated, familiar accusations may have limited impact, but a new, verifiable revelation could still shift the agenda in the final days. The 2026 campaign has repeatedly shown that scandals can produce rapid shifts. Foreign interference
Democratic lawmakers in the United States have formally pressed the Trump administration to commit to recognizing Brazil’s election result, regardless of the winner. The letter from 31 lawmakers, including Senator Bernie Sanders, asks the State Department for answers by October 1. At the same time, Lula’s campaign has incorporated sovereignty and criticism of Trump into its electoral messaging. The central question will be how to distinguish external political support from any potential use of foreign state or economic instruments to influence the contest. Culture wars and religion
The controversy over the status of Our Lady of Aparecida as Brazil's patron saint showed how a religious issue can spread across social media and, within days, produce conflicting decisions between the Superior Electoral Court and the Supreme Court. Quaest recorded significant movement toward Lula’s candidacy among Catholics and women during the controversy, although it is not possible to attribute those shifts to any single cause. The episode also revealed another risk: the judicial dispute over disinformation has begun to fuel accusations of institutional interference in the electoral process. The final week, therefore, begins with fewer undecided voters, but not necessarily fewer possibilities for movement. Strategic voting, turnout, government measures, scandals, digital platforms, foreign interference, and culture-war issues can still shift margins. What remains uncertain is how much each political camp can mobilize, recover, or lose before the polls close on Sunday.
|
