CNN commentator José Eduardo Cardozo and the businessman Leonardo Bortoletto debated, this Tuesday (5), in The Great Debate (Monday to Friday, at 11pm), about the dispute over the Palácio do Planalto. Between President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) and Senator Flávio Bolsonaro (PL), who has more room to grow?
One showed Flávio Bolsonaro numerically ahead of Lula in the second round. The numbers indicate that Flávio went from 41% to 44%, while Lula went from 42% to 43% — a difference within the margin of error of two percentage points. The survey interviewed 2,000 voters across the country between May 2nd and 4th, 2026, with a confidence level of 95%.
Blank and invalid votes fell from 10% to 7%, and those who declared they did not know or did not want to answer fell from 7% to 6%.
Greater wear in the right field
José Eduardo Cardozo assessed that the research reveals a polarized country and that the difference of one point between the candidates constitutes, in practice, a technical tie. For him, the main vulnerability is on the right, where different candidates — including Flávio Bolsonaro, Ronaldo Caiado and Zema — are competing for the same electorate. “The possibility of right-wing candidates fighting could be a decisive element in a process in which I have an already consolidated candidate,” he stated.
Cardozo also highlighted that when trying to attract voters from the center, distancing himself from the image of his father, Jair Bolsonaro. According to him, this stance generates reactions from other candidates on the same spectrum, who try to present themselves as more aligned with the Bolsonarist base. The analyst also cited issues such as the “rachadinha”, the mansion acquired by Flávio and the chocolate store as themes that could be explored during the electoral campaign.
Bortoletto points out the government’s economic wear and tear
Leonardo Bortoletto, in turn, disagreed by emphasizing that the main factor of wear and tear falls on the current government. For him, the economic issue is decisive in any electoral process, and the government has not been able to reverse the population’s negative perception of purchasing power. “Brazilians’ purchasing power is truly impoverished,” he stated, pointing to the flattening of wages and the increase in taxation and inflation as central elements of this scenario.
The analyst recognized that initiatives such as Desenrola 2.0 represent attempts by the government to maintain its relevance among the electorate, and that the fall in the dollar during the week was a positive fact. However, he maintained that, without a clear sign of improvement in purchasing power, the trend is for the government to get worse until the elections. “I believe that the Lula government will be more harmed,” he concluded.
Debate on electoral ceiling and polarization
The two analysts agreed that the polarization between left and right should continue until the elections and that there is no relevant space for a third way. Cardozo argued that the left has the advantage of having a single and already consolidated candidate, while the right tends to fragment internally. He also cited the tensions between supporters of Flávio Bolsonaro and Michelle Bolsonaro, in addition to the attacks promoted by Zema’s supporters, as examples of this internal dispute.
Bortoletto, on the other hand, considered that talking about “” would be premature, as the campaigns have not yet been formally presented. When analyzing the research in detail, the businessman observed that Lula’s variation between the first and second round is very small, which would indicate that he would already be closer to his possible ceiling than the right-wing candidates. Both recognized the difficulty of making reliable predictions at this point in the electoral process.
