Opinion – Vinicius Torres Freire: Ciro, Simone and another handful of votes that may elect Lula

For a month and a half, differences in Datafolha polls on the presidential election have been small. It would even be possible to say that, in an extreme, unlikely case, the difference between Lula da Silva (PT) and Jair Bolsonaro (PL) has practically not changed in these weeks. This does not seem to be the case, given the set of statistics, such as the decrease in the PT advantage also in the second round or the slight improvement in the government’s assessment. But the election can be decided in detail, in niches, in handfuls of votes.

Before continuing, three reminders:

1. Lula has 48% of valid votes in the first round (almost 52% at the end of July);
2. Not very decisive voters of Ciro Gomes (PDT) and Simone Tebet (MDB) can yield two points for Lula, at the limit;
3. It seems like a trifle, but remember: Lula passed to the second round of the 1989 presidential election with an advantage of 0.67% of the votes over Leonel Brizola (1922-2004), of the PDT.

What could still be decisive, like a definition in the first round or means for Bolsonaro to reduce the great distance to Lula in a second round?

First, there are fewer and fewer votes left in the undecided, null, and white pool and there are fewer people who are openly inclined to change their minds. In the electorate as a whole, 77% say they are decided; they are 86% among Lula’s voters, 83% among Bolsonaro’s.

There may be votes to explore in Ciro and Simone’s basket, it should be noted: 54% of the voters of each say they can change their vote. At the limit, at the tip of the pencil, today they would give Lula a victory in the first round, everything else constant.

Second, Bolsonaro’s advance indicates the relative success of a strategy: preying on Lula, regaining votes in their niches and taking advantage of the discreet socioeconomic improvement. If you can take the numbers literally (the differences are small), Bolsonaro has advanced by retaking votes among men, evangelicals and, apparently, in the interior of the Southeast.

Lula seems to have no strategy other than to hope that the rejection of Bolsonaro continues in the majority and that the Bolsonarista campaign does not do more damage to the PT’s image. “Playing still”, as they say.

Third, Lula beats Bolsonaro by 58% to 42% in a second round. If abstentions, nulls and blanks from 2018 are repeated, Bolsonaro would need to take some 9 million votes away from Lula in order to tie the game. Is it a lot or is it possible?

The rejection of Bolsonaro among voters of Ciro (65%) and Simone (73%) remains much higher than their average rejection (51%). For this game to turn, Lula has to do something big and/or Bolsonaro have to provoke a convulsion in the four weeks of campaigning of a second round. Why wouldn’t Bolsonaro do it?

Of more immediate interest, the closing of the election in the first round is still a hypothesis on the table, although falling over the edges. The Bolsonarian strategy gives some results and the economic improvement should still earn points. Still, there are useful votes to be fished in Ciro and Simone’s ponds. But Lulismo has no novelty or inspiration, when it doesn’t seem bewildered, as in its relationship with evangelicals. Will he have something to say to cirists or to niche voters that he could talk to on social media or in cell phone messages? Do you know how to do it?

To pay attention: a more extensive abstention of certain electorates can decide the election, by trifles of votes. Engaging voters to the end, so that they go to vote, can be decisive. It may even be that tenths of a percentage of the vote for PSTU or PCB candidacies will make a difference in a close election (and the Pros, which still appeared in this poll, will no longer have a candidate and will support Lula).