“We need to talk to all the people in this country who didn’t vote with us on the first ballot,” the flag-bearer of the Labor Party president said at an event with allies in Sao Paulo.
He insisted that “now the election (second round on October 30th) is not ideological, we will speak to all political forces that have a vote”, representativeness, political importance, to add the Democrats to a bloc against those who are not .
Before the election, Lula had 48.43 percent (57.2 million) of valid votes in the first ballot against 43.20 percent (51 million) for Bolsonaro, who is seeking reelection from the Liberal Party.
The former union leader and the former military officer did not receive an absolute majority of votes, ie more than half of the valid votes (excluding blanks and zero votes) set for the election under national legislation.
For months, opinion polls have suggested that despite a victory in the first consultation, Lula is the big favorite to return to the Planalto Palace (seat of the executive branch).
However, according to analysts, there was an unexpected rebound in Bolsonarianism (supporters of the ruler) and the conservative wave, which contradicted the polls of accredited institutes and consultants.
Political commentators assert that these actors managed to fuel the discourse and anti-Lula and anti-PT movement that had a surprising impact on historic Election Day.
They specify that the presidential candidates of the so-called third way (middle left) who were rejected in the first round are now becoming important.
It is expected that his supporters, having seen that his candidate did not win, will favor the vote of the two candidates who will face each other in the second round.
In particular, the voters of Senator Simone Tebet of the Brazilian Democratic Movement and former Minister Ciro Gomes of the Labor Democratic Party, two presidential candidates who came third and fourth in the vote count.
The results of the first round have shattered the polls’ predictions, and when judged by experts, the number of errors affects the credibility of election research firms.
For Leandro Gabiati, a PhD in political science, research institutes are part of the electoral process and help voters better understand the context in which they will vote, but low assertiveness hinders the election scenario.
rgh/ocs