Opinion – Vinicius Torres Freire: There is a Brazil in which Bolsonaro draws with Lula

In the whole of Brazil, Lula da Silva (PT) has 43% of the votes; Jair Bolsonaro (PL), 26%. In the second round, Lula wins by 55% to 34%, voters tell Datafolha this early autumn.

In the country where family income is more than two minimum wages, Bolsonaro is tied with Lula in the first round (by 34%) and in the second as well. Among families earning less than two salaries, Lula sometimes wins by 51% to 19% in the first round. In the December poll, Lula was winning in these two large income groups.

Lula wins in all education classes (among those who studied up to elementary school, high school or even college) and among all age groups on Datafolha. It wins among men, more Bolsonaristas, although by a narrower margin (40% to 31%, in the first round). By the poll’s margin of error, it may be tied with Bolsonaro in the South and Midwest/North regions. More notable, however, is this tie in the higher income classes.

With the tricks of statistics, given the margin of error, it is possible that, in the extreme case, Lula could be six points ahead of Bolsonaro (and vice versa). Still, the contrast between these two income groups (under two salaries versus above two) is significant not only because of the difference in preferences between the two candidates.

Two minimum wages are equivalent to R$2,424. It is a little less than the average income from work in Brazil, of R$ 2,755, in January. This is the average of the individual earnings declared to the IBGE in the Pnad, which includes from people who do odd jobs to those who employ people, from domestic workers without a formal contract to civil servants, including salaried workers with or without CLT. But, in the Datafolha survey, it is about family income.

It is possible that some people are confused by the idea of ​​family income or do not have precise knowledge of how much the family earns. In any case, whether the income statement is more or less accurate, R$ 2,424 means life in a pinch.

In addition to being tight, to continue in the euphemism, life is made more difficult by inflation of 10% per year. The real average income has dropped from one year to now, because the famine eats the purchasing power of those who already had their salary or something similar and the new jobs pay little.

Averages, of course, hide the real stories. It may well be that among those satisfied with Jair Bolsonaro there is a small crowd that has improved in life, that has gone from this to a less worse one. As should also be evident to any adult person with practical sense, the material situation of the individual is far from determining his political choice or at least his vote.

So, half of the people with a family income of more than two minimum wages believe that, in the balance of their interests and beliefs, it is better to vote for Bolsonaro than for Lula. Who knows how each one does this accounting, but, for his electorate, Bolsonaro does not commit enough disqualifying faults to accept Lula — and even less other candidates.

The administration of the epidemic, the attacks on the vaccine (in a country of 75% of those vaccinated with dose 2), the savage prejudices, the threats of a coup against democracy, the environmental disaster, the indecent behavior, the accusations of cracking, none of that it surpasses the perceived set of negative characteristics of Lula (and, even more, of other candidates, very distant in the dispute for the votes). Or, in an inverse perspective, Bolsonaro has more qualities than other competitors, for half of the electorate with a family income greater than R$ 2,424.