Decisive voters are incompatible with Bolsonarism and underestimated by Lula (or vice versa)

Flávio Bolsonaro is positioning himself as a moderate figure for the upcoming election, adopting a strategy of silence on key issues and engaging in less substantive campaign activities. This approach, coupled with his generally cordial demeanor, was intended to appeal to a broader electorate. However, the inherent nature of "bolsonarismo" is seen as incompatible with prudence, and his past actions remain a potential liability.

Lula's campaign has strategically held back its most damaging information on Flávio Bolsonaro. The plan was to wait until Tarcísio de Freitas, the governor of São Paulo, was no longer a viable candidate, thereby consolidating Bolsonaro's position as the main alternative. Once Flávio was the clear frontrunner, Lula's campaign intended to unleash accusations related to "rachadinha" (embezzlement), illicit enrichment, and alleged ties to militias.

The objective of this strategy was not to win over the staunch Bolsonaro base, who tend to view any accusations against the family as political persecution. Instead, the aim was to deter a minority of independent voters from supporting Flávio. The campaign also anticipates that Flávio's brothers, Carlos and Eduardo, will continue their pattern of attacking centrist and center-right voters, a counterproductive habit.

Despite the strategy, Lula has received unexpected advantages. Flávio Bolsonaro's association with controversial banker Daniel Vorcaro, including an audio recording allegedly requesting funds, has damaged his image, particularly among cautious voters. Polls indicate a slight dip in Flávio's support, potentially impacting his electoral chances. Furthermore, the perception that US tariffs and threats to the Pix payment system were orchestrated by the Bolsonaros has also played into Lula's hands.

With Flávio Bolsonaro potentially weakened, Lula can now campaign in his preferred style, focusing on his base and employing aggressive rhetoric. He can emphasize divisions between rich and poor, employers and workers, and revive his anti-capitalist and anti-entrepreneurial discourse. This approach reflects a pre-1989 vision of a state that stifles investment and relies on extensive welfare programs to compensate for economic failures. For other candidates, the challenge of attracting voters beyond the independent minority remains significant.