The , founded in 1983, has been asking since 1987 whether voters consider the President of the Republic’s government to be excellent or good, average, bad or terrible. Since then, the evaluation of representatives has fluctuated mainly according to performance in the economy, corruption scandals and public security crises.
The polarizing environment and changes in the dynamics of information consumption are also pointed out as factors that flattened a president’s approval threshold. There are now more voters convinced against or in favor of a president, which makes it difficult to reach very high levels of popularity, such as those seen between 2010 and 2013.
“After 2014, no president managed to achieve positive evaluation rates above 42%. Polarization certainly contributes”, says Luciana Chong, director of Datafolha.
She explains that government evaluation surveys allow comparison over time as they follow a similar methodology since redemocratization, with the exception of the initial surveys by the Sarney government, restricted to capitals.
For political scientist Creomar de Souza, professor at Fundação Dom Cabral and founder of political consultancy Dharma, the informational cacophony produced by social networks is a relevant factor in understanding the difficulty of governments like that of President Lula (PT) in expanding positive evaluation.
If the flow of information is very fast, he states, the gains resulting from government actions also tend to dissipate more quickly, a phenomenon that affects the electoral process.
He points out the role of the PT in polarizing and changing the way voters evaluate a president. For Creomar, the us versus them logic, encouraged by Lula’s acronym, causes difficulties for the government’s dialogue with those who are not its loyal voters.
The handling of political, economic and institutional crises also appears as a recurring factor in the fluctuation of presidential popularity throughout the historical series.
“And today this dynamic is at its peak: in the Lula administration, those who voted for Bolsonaro will evaluate the government very poorly, and Lulistas will tend to evaluate the government very well, in a dynamic in which everything is justifiable, in a certain sense. Successes are always justifiable by supporters, mistakes are always superlativized by opponents”, says Cremoar.
Next, read the chronology of approval and rejection rates measured by Datafolha.
Hyperinflation was one of the country’s main problems at the beginning of redemocratization. José Sarney, the first civilian to govern the country after 21 years in the military, created economic plans to try to contain rising prices and economically reorganize the State in a scenario of lack of control over public accounts and growing external debt.
The Cruzado, Bresser and Verão plans were unsuccessful, and the president’s popularity trajectory, which started low, continued like this until the end of his term. Not even the promulgation of the 1988 Constitution managed to boost Sarney.
In this context of frustration with the economy and traditional politics, the fight against corruption gains strength. The then governor of , de Mello (at the time in the PRN), was elected president in 1989 promising to end inflation and moralize public administration.
In addition to failing to control the inflationary process, Collor began to receive greater disapproval as the scandals in his government emerged.
With Itamar Franco (PMDB), once again the economic agenda once again gained prominence in the government’s assessment. Inflation persisted, and the rejection of Minas Gerais increased until the implementation of , in 1994.
The rejection of Itamar measured by Datafolha shows a respite in the increase in the bad or terrible index from the real Cruzeiro, a currency implemented in the initial stage of the plan, and a turnaround in popularity after the launch of the real and the fall in inflation.
The success of the plan led to the election of (), Minister of Finance of Itamar.
The initial popularity of the new government reflected confidence in the Real Plan, but began to fluctuate in the face of external crises and unemployment.
The collapse of the financial system impacted the entire world at the end of FHC’s first term, which devalued the Real from January 1999 onwards. Approval fell and remained at lower levels than the first four years of the government.
The best evaluation of the toucan in the second term occurred between February and July 2002, close to the presidential election. The government still experienced the consequences of the economic crisis and a mega-rebellion by the criminal faction.
The toucan was unable to take (PSDB) to the Planalto Palace. (PT) was elected with the promise of maintaining the economic foundations built by Real and focusing on combating poverty.
The PT member maintained a stable assessment of his inauguration, in 2003, until the emergence of corruption scandals, such as bingos and the monthly allowance, in 2004 and 2005, which overturned his approval. Still, he managed to secure re-election in 2006.
The PT member finished his term with 83% excellent or good, 13% average and 4% bad or terrible. He elected (PT) as his successor.
In her first term, she reacted to corruption scandals with what she promised would be an “ethical cleanup” and reached her peak approval rating in March 2013, with 65% excellent or good, according to Datafolha.
The June 2013 protests, however, dropped her popularity by 27 percentage points, leading to a 30% positive rating, and, after further fluctuations, the PT member was re-elected by a narrow margin.
From the second term onwards, a new phase begins in Dilma’s government. With the economic recession, the government cuts spending and combs social benefits, and pessimism about the economy increases. August 2015 is the worst moment for the president, who registers her lowest approval and highest disapproval.
The situation continued to be bad for the PT member after the impeachment process was opened by the then president of , (MDB). The impeachment ended Dilma’s second term and opened a new political cycle in Planalto.
With (MDB), the economic crisis persisted, and the release of a recording of a conversation with Joesley Batista almost led the then president to resign. In 2018, the truck drivers’ strike and the advance of polarization, driven by anti-PTism and the anti-corruption agenda, marked the period.
Jair Bolsonaro’s (PL) mandate was characterized by his denialist stance on the pandemic and by the series of attacks on the Powers, especially the .
Disapproval of the then president peaked after the release of a ministerial meeting in 2020, in the wake of the dismissal of the then minister of Brazil, on the grounds that Bolsonaro had tried to interfere in the Federal Police.
The negative assessment increased again in the face of the oxygen shortage crisis in Manaus and continued to increase in 2021, when it threatened not to comply with Supreme Court decisions.
The rates only improved again from March 2022, when vaccination in the country against the coronavirus advanced. The recovery, however, was not enough to guarantee Bolsonaro’s re-election.
Returning to Planalto for a third term, Lula maintained a stable rating during the first two years of government, but lost popularity in the face of the crisis, when the government was forced to revoke a Federal Revenue regulation on monitoring financial transactions.
The PT member was slowly regaining popularity after using the discourse of sovereignty to respond to the sanctions against Brazil. More recently, the recovery of the assessment was slowed down with the police in .
