In just over 24 hours, the Lula government suffered two defeats that disrupted the political scene. On Wednesday (29), by 42 to 34, being the first refusal of a presidential nominee to the Court in 132 years. The following day, Câmara e, paving the way for the reduction of sentences for those convicted on January 8th. The scores exposed an isolated Planalto and at the center of the articulation against the government.
According to data from , which analyzes more than 100,000 public e groups in real time, the volume of messages on the topic multiplied eightfold between the Monday before the vote and the Thursday (30), the day on which Congress overturned the veto in the case of dosimetry. is mentioned in 3 out of every 4 messages; , in 1 in every 4; and Alcolumbre appears in 12% of the total, which is impressive for a name that, just a few weeks ago, did not have great popularity.
The reading is unfavorable to the government in a proportion of more than 3 to 1. Among the messages with an explicit political position, 68% celebrate the defeat or attack the Planalto, against 20% who defend Lula. In the opposition camp, the most robust narrative, which accounts for 8% of all messages, is that it would be “equipped” and that Messiah would be the final piece of a “power project” by the . In parallel, the pejorative nickname “Bessias” and variations that classify the former as “crybaby” or “communist” appear in 5% of the total volume. The image of “satisfied” with the veto being overturned also gained traction in the groups.
Naturally, the discussion surrounding the disapproval of the name of Messiah gains strength due to the political representation of defeat. The fact itself has little impact on the lives of the population, but the opposition turned the case into a narrative of a weakened government. Added to this is a Congress that reacts with unprecedented autonomy and a center that has begun to move away from the Planalto with an eye on 2026. In the groups analyzed, the government’s defeat is converted into a preview of the electoral dispute.
In the case of the government’s defense on the networks, there was a delay in structuring the lines of argument and it never reached the same scale of repercussion. The most widespread argument tries to shift the focus to Messiah’s possible departure to Brazil, framed as the president’s “reaction”. Another line denounces that overturning the veto “would benefit the January 8 coup plotters”. A third argument classifies Congress as a “coup leader” or hostage to the “extreme right”. Finally, a smaller portion replicates the speech attributed to an “alliance between Alcolumbre and the most corrupt son of prisoner Bolsonaro” to “shield coup plotters”. Each of these narrative lines did not exceed 3% in relation to the volume of messages, demonstrating a dispersion.
The reaction, on the networks, in narratives favorable to the government arrived late, without organization and dispersed across four different angles. While the opposition spoke on a single note, classifying the act as a “historic defeat”, the government spoke on four fronts at the same time. In the digital environment, repetition and simplicity win over sophistication.
The week confirms a trend that has been going on since the beginning of the year, in which Planalto’s digital base is unable to sustain the pace of opposing narratives when the news highlights institutional fragility. Messiah can still go to court and Lula can still nominate another name to the STF, but, in the public groups analyzed by Palver, the one who left the week with the story told their way was the opposition.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
