Tiago Leifert criticizes the ‘virtual police of customs’ and defends null vote

Tiago Leifert, 42, published a video this Tuesday afternoon (7) on his Instagram, responding to the various criticisms he received for his declared political position in some interviews in recent weeks. The presenter stated that he was wrong to speak about what he thinks, but continued to defend his possible null vote.

“I made a serious mistake, I spoke as I think politically. Since then I’ve been called a coward, imbecile, stupid, that I don’t know anything about life,” he said, who started the controversy by saying on the Tapa na Cara podcast that “I preferred take a shot” to vote for Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) or Jair Bolsonaro (PL) in the second round of the presidential elections.

In a six-minute video, Leifert said he was attacked after expressing his opinion and highlighted how the “teacher tone” bothers him: “They say: ‘You don’t know anything, I know everything. vote for who I want.’ Look how curious,” he said. “Funny, in my head that’s the most undemocratic thing.”

Leifert did not name names, but called his critics “virtual police of customs” that “subjugates, humiliates and curses just because he thinks differently from her” and added, defending the debate and conversation to convince someone to change their opinion. “We need to give people the right to say whatever they want.”

The statements about Leifert’s possible null vote provoked a flurry of criticism, such as that of the businessman and influencer Felipe Neto, who, without mentioning the journalist’s name, made clear on social media his indignation with the null vote and fired: “You are a disgust”.

The controversy increased even more this Monday (6), when, in a new live broadcast, Leifert responded to the provocation of colleague Rica Perrone. “I wanted to congratulate you, because you are officially a disaffected by Felipe Neto. I think you reached a remarkable level in your incredible trajectory”, said Perrone.

“We’re here talking about the Brazilian team, the World Cup, Neymar. Let’s keep the level high and go back to talking about football rather than wasting time with Twitter guys, Twitter trolley, I don’t know who, Felipe I don’t know who there. That’s a little Twitter troll. We’re talking about the World Cup, looking at the biggest event in the world, we’re going to honor you [espectadores da live] with content and not talk about inferior people”, replied Leifert.

The exchange of barbs then continued on Tuesday. “Being called ‘inferior people’ by a shoe would make limer who hates poor is literally a compliment”, shot Felipe Neto on his Twitter, also reposting other netizens who were debating the subject, such as football commentator Gerd Wenzel and writer Henry Bug.

“In his controversy with Felipe Neto, Tiago Leifert refers to the youtuber as ‘inferior people’. The term used refers to the Nazi ideology to describe ‘inferior people or peoples'”, Wenzel wrote.

Bugalho, on the other hand, said that he has seen “people think they are superior because they like classical music, have a PhD in something, talk about complex subjects that most people don’t understand, and that doesn’t even justify it. It was the first time I saw someone feel superior because he is talking about football, the World Cup and Neymar”.

This is not the first time that Leifert has been involved in controversy on social networks since leaving the presentation of Big Brother Brasil and Rede Globo. At the end of last year, the presenter did not like a comment by actor Ícaro Silva saying that he would never participate in the reality show because he considered it “mediocre entertainment”.

When answering it, Leifert made the controversy even greater by stating that “we probably paid your salary”, referring to the success of BBB during a period of shortage of productions because of the pandemic. The speech, however, was seen as racist and earned another series of criticisms to the presenter.

On the occasion, Leifert also ended the barb exchanges with a long video posted on his social networks. “I was attacked because of my religion, because of my family and I didn’t do that at any time. I didn’t attack anyone’s family, I didn’t attack anyone’s nature, I didn’t attack anyone’s trajectory, I didn’t do that. at any time,” he said.