Changes in the dynamics of the relationship between politicians and the electorate create difficulties for analysis and require the adoption of new criteria when examining the progress of . This gives rise to seemingly inexplicable circumstances. What was worth is no longer worth.
In the current scene, two factors that are theoretically strong enough to shake or boost voting intentions are the picture portrayed by .
Both (PT) and () remained more or less where they were in previous surveys, despite the former sponsoring spending estimated at R$190 billion to attract voters and the latter being caught in repeated lies about the relationship with Daniel Vorcaro.
There was a change in the indexes, but the . From a draw, the situation moved to a distance of nine to four percentage points with an advantage for , according to the measurements of the first and second rounds recorded in the last survey .
As loved as they are rejected, the two consolidate fans driven by love and hate, resulting in a paralysis of the scene. The kindnesses of one and the misdeeds of the other did not shake the favoritism of both, introducing an unknown and a concrete fact in the exercise of interpretation.
Why does this happen? This doubt is in principle resolved by the polarization factor. It doesn’t explain everything. The certainty that can be drawn from this situation is the impossibility of establishing comparisons with examples from the past.
Lula is no longer able to rely on the myth of the provider of the underprivileged, as when he got away with the Mensalão scandal. Flávio Bolsonaro was not beaten down like in 2002, when a photo of money found in his husband’s office interrupted his upward trajectory in the polls for president.
Time passed, politics did not improve and the electorate, apparently, fell into the trap of dominated emotions.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
