Brazil Election - 5 October 2014
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:37:25 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Brazil Election - 5 October 2014
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 34
Author Topic: Brazil Election - 5 October 2014  (Read 124394 times)
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #275 on: September 27, 2014, 09:49:19 PM »

Thank you for your extremely informative answer, Paleobrazilian! Smiley

Seems Aecio really screwed himself with his own Party. Aren't things such as "Lula-Aecio" and "Dilma-Anastasia" a big no-no for PT and PSDB establishments?

A thought of Aecio switching to PMDB or PTB and becoming their candidate is interesting. Haven't PMDB last run a candidate in 1994? Quite interesting for the biggest party.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #276 on: September 27, 2014, 10:06:38 PM »

Well the PMDB is just supposed to be... there. That is its job. It would be antithetical to its purpose, that being taking as much as a share a of the trough of governance as is possible. Nothing that cannot be done as part of a coalition, at this point.

In a country of amorphous parties, the PMDB excels in having as little as a cohesive ideology as possible; it is a different thing with every candidate, not to mention every state. To run a candidate would would almost certainly be disastrous, and probably precipitate its breakup. But, of course, that doesn't exclude them from trying.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #277 on: September 27, 2014, 10:39:37 PM »
« Edited: September 27, 2014, 10:41:28 PM by Paleobrazilian »

Well the PMDB is just supposed to be... there. That is its job. It would be antithetical to its purpose, that being taking as much as a share a of the trough of governance as is possible. Nothing that cannot be done as part of a coalition, at this point.

In a country of amorphous parties, the PMDB excels in having as little as a cohesive ideology as possible; it is a different thing with every candidate, not to mention every state. To run a candidate would would almost certainly be disastrous, and probably precipitate its breakup. But, of course, that doesn't exclude them from trying.


Actually having the Presidency would give them direct and unstoppable access to the machine and the $$$, something they have dreamed ever since the Constitutional Assembly. They considered attracting Aecio to them between 2006 and 2010, but the restriction on party switches placed by Brazil's Supreme Court stopped him from seriously considering the move at that moment (if he switched his party he'd have to surrender his Governor seat). Some within the PMDB wanted the former Governor of Rio de Janeiro, Sergio Cabral, to run for the Presidency this year, and many believed that even if he lost this year, he'd be an interesting possibility for 2018. But Cabral is now a pretty toxic figure, even in his own state, so I don't really see him as a viable alternative anymore.

Overall, I don't think the PMDB will have a presidential candidate for 2018. That's really not their #1 strategy. But that's a point they love to raise when their relations with the PT turn sour and when they're demanding more cabinet posts. It's hard to predict the electoral landscape for 2018 so early on in a country with 32 political parties, and 5 more ready to be authorized by the TSE, so this possibility can't be ruled out right now.

Thank you for your extremely informative answer, Paleobrazilian! Smiley

Seems Aecio really screwed himself with his own Party. Aren't things such as "Lula-Aecio" and "Dilma-Anastasia" a big no-no for PT and PSDB establishments?

A thought of Aecio switching to PMDB or PTB and becoming their candidate is interesting. Haven't PMDB last run a candidate in 1994? Quite interesting for the biggest party.

The PT never really cared because they knew they weren't competitive on state races in Minas Gerais in 2006 and 2010. The PSDB couldn't do much about this because national agreements don't bound local agreements, so local allies were absolutely free to promote those bizarre tickets. This year PSDB candidates are going even further, as Alckmin and Richa, for example, got Beto Albuquerque to run ads in favor of their campaigns (something that displeased BOTH Aecio and Marina).
Logged
buritobr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,604


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #278 on: September 28, 2014, 10:33:59 AM »

I think it is fair that the low populated states are overrepresented in the Congress. But the Senate already does this job. Every state has three senators, no matter the population. It is understandable, considering that the senators represent the states, not the people.

Since the Senate already exists, it is not necessary the low populated states to be overrepresented and São Paulo to be underrepresented in the Chamber of Deputies too. I am against the minimum limit of 8 and the maximum limit of 70 legislators for each state. However, this rule will never change. It is necessary a constitutional ammendment to change this rule, approved by 3/5 of the chambre and the senate. Since the North and the Northeast are favored by the overrepresentation of low populated states, a constitutional ammendment like this will never be approved.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #279 on: September 28, 2014, 10:50:52 AM »

I think it is fair that the low populated states are overrepresented in the Congress. But the Senate already does this job. Every state has three senators, no matter the population. It is understandable, considering that the senators represent the states, not the people.

Since the Senate already exists, it is not necessary the low populated states to be overrepresented and São Paulo to be underrepresented in the Chamber of Deputies too. I am against the minimum limit of 8 and the maximum limit of 70 legislators for each state. However, this rule will never change. It is necessary a constitutional amendment to change this rule, approved by 3/5 of the chambre and the senate. Since the North and the Northeast are favored by the overrepresentation of low populated states, a constitutional amendment like this will never be approved.

So no possibility of changing the constitution via a referendum under any circumstances?
Logged
buritobr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,604


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #280 on: September 28, 2014, 11:16:50 AM »

Well, the left-wing parties, including PT and PCdoB, and the oppositionist PSOL, are supporting a referendum in order to change the political system. They don't mention state representation, but they support that the money for the electoral campaign should be provided by the state and not by firms's donations, in order to avoid that the economic power influence the political power. They also argue that private firms who donate money for electoral campaign receive the money back through government procurement, when the candidates they support are elected (well, it happens also in PT administrations). That's why the companies who build large public works are the main donators in electoral campaigns. PT wants also to end the vote for individual candidates in the election for the legislative branch, the system that I explained in the post before. PT considers that the voters should vote only for parties, not for individual candidates, like in the other countries who implemente proportional representation.

But the referendum should be approved by the congress...

In early september, the left-wing parties organized na unnoficial referendum... Well, but this referendum was... unnoficial.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #281 on: September 28, 2014, 11:32:58 AM »
« Edited: September 28, 2014, 02:18:03 PM by politicus »


But the referendum should be approved by the congress...

Also by a 3/5 majority? Or would a simple majority be enough?

Btw isn't it quite common that PR systems allow you to vote for either a party or a candidate? I never really thought about it, since we have always done so in Denmark  and I just assumed it was fairly normal. In a strong party system it doesn't weaken parties (and FPTP countries can obviously have quite strong party systems, even if everybody votes for a candidate). But I can see how it may inhibited the establishment of a strong party system.

Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #282 on: September 28, 2014, 03:10:45 PM »
« Edited: September 28, 2014, 03:21:44 PM by Paleobrazilian »

A referendum to reform the Constitution could only be called by the 3/5 supermajority. As buritobr correctly pointed out, this is (sadly) virtually impossible, considering how disproportional is the representation on the Chamber of Deputies. The North, the Northeast and the Center-West would vote in block to stop any attempt of establishing true proportional allocation of Congressmen between the states.

I think the only realistic possibility of doing this nowadays would be vastly increasing the number of Congressman in the Chamber. Under some calculations I did some years ago, by increasing the number of Congressman by 150 it would be possible for almost all states to keep the representation on the Chamber they currently have. The only states that would lose would be Acre, Roraima and Amapá, very sparsely inhabited northern states. But creating more Congressmen would probably be hugely unpopular with voters, as Congress is disapproved by 80% of the population and each Congressman represents a huge cost for taxpayers.
Logged
buritobr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,604


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #283 on: September 28, 2014, 03:19:52 PM »

The rejection of the vote for individual candidates is not a consensus in the left. The mainstream of the PT supports the party list vote, but the left-wing of the PT considers that this changes would give too much power for the bureaucracies of the parties.

I didn't know that in Denmark people could vote for candidates too. So, the Danish system looks like Brazilian system.

On the other side, the right used to support the implementation of the pure FPTP, like the one in the USA and UK. But nowadays, the right realized that the current system allows the elected Congress to be more conservative than the elected presidents.

Green party candidate Eduardo Jorge and other centrists support a constitutional amendment to implement a mixed FPTP-PR system, like the one in Germany.

I like the German system, but I don't think it is possible to implement in Brazil. We don't have districts since 1930. I think that drawing congressional districts would be an impossible task.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #284 on: September 28, 2014, 03:20:32 PM »


But the referendum should be approved by the congress...

Also by a 3/5 majority? Or would a simple majority be enough?

Btw isn't it quite common that PR systems allow you to vote for either a party or a candidate? I never really thought about it, since we have always done so in Denmark  and I just assumed it was fairly normal. In a strong party system it doesn't weaken parties (and FPTP countries can obviously have quite strong party systems, even if everybody votes for a candidate). But I can see how it may inhibited the establishment of a strong party system.



That's possible in Brazil. What the PT wants to do is replacing the open list system, where you can vote for the party OR for a single candidate, by the closed list system, where you can only vote for the party. In the open list currently used seats are allocated proportionally and the list is composed by the number of votes each candidate of the colligation got. Under the closed, the list would be previously established by the party.

The PSDB, meanwhile, favors combining one of those systems with district voting. Inside districts, the rule would probably be FPTP.
Logged
buritobr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,604


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #285 on: September 28, 2014, 10:53:19 PM »

I watched only the end of the debate, but considering what I read in the Twitter and Facebook, probably Aécio Neves will go to the runoff.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #286 on: September 29, 2014, 06:01:26 AM »

Second, it's crucial to understand the shift I mentioned above. When the PSDB was created back in 1988, it was supposed to be a "new left" political party, Brazil's own "new Labour". It's most prominent members in the beginning were well known left wing thinkers such as FHC, José Serra, José Aníbal, etc. As any "new left" group, they were pretty much a center-left party with highly pragmatical policies. The best example is the famous "infusion of capitalism" speech given by the great Mario Covas back in 1989, when he mentioned the urging need of more liberalism allied to social policies. That was pretty much the PSDB you had until 2002.

When the PT took over the federal government, it pretty much took over the center-left sweet spot the PSDB and it's older leaders occupied (perhaps a tad to the left than the PSDB used to be). Some will say the PSDB was a right wing party back then, I strongly reject this notion but I guess this depends on what one consider as left or right. Anyway, it's pretty clear PSDB members started to shift slowly to the right after 2002, slowly embracing economic liberalism less shyly and some conservative social policies (specially on law enforcement matters). This trend was accelerated in 2010 and 2012, when many toucans and close allies were elected under center-right platforms and policies, including Alckmin, Beto Richa, Aloysio Nunes, ACM Neto, etc. Alckmin is running a decidely center-right campaign this year (specially on law enforcement matters, where he's adopting a strong law and order speech) that's proving to be very successful.

Well, personally I always saw it this way: PSDB pretty much started as a classical social democratic party (including Covas supporting Lula against Collor in 1989, after not making it into the runoff). In 1990s, like many social democratic parties, PSBD embraced third way policy, as evident with FHQ famous statement of rejecting "outdated labels" such as "left" and "right". By 2000s, and with third way philosophy demise, the party simply could not shift back to the left, even if they wanted to, because there is simply not enough room.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #287 on: September 29, 2014, 08:06:28 AM »

IBOPE and Datafolha will be releasing national and big state polls tomorrow and Thursday. I believe both will also release their final polls Saturday night. IBOPE will also definitely realize it's traditional exit poll Sunday.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #288 on: September 29, 2014, 10:31:18 AM »
« Edited: September 29, 2014, 10:51:05 AM by Paleobrazilian »

Bovespa is plummeting nearly 4% with Petrobras losing about 10% with Datafolha's last poll and general fears about Marina getting weaker each passing day. The prospect of 4 more years of PT is clearly scaring the market, specially because Dilma has adopted a pretty leftist, populist speech to knock Marina down. There's growing consensus within the government that Dilma will have to make mends with the financial market if she's reelected, specially because there are growing concerns that Brazil will remain with inflation above 5% and growth below 2% at least until the end of 2016.

PS: with the fears of Dilma's reelection, foreign investors are fleeing from Brazil, taking aways dollars from the market. The US$ has just reached it's highest rate against the Real since December 2008, the height of the financial crisis. This brings fears of more inflation.
Logged
buritobr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,604


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #289 on: September 29, 2014, 07:26:22 PM »

Second, it's crucial to understand the shift I mentioned above. When the PSDB was created back in 1988, it was supposed to be a "new left" political party, Brazil's own "new Labour". It's most prominent members in the beginning were well known left wing thinkers such as FHC, José Serra, José Aníbal, etc. As any "new left" group, they were pretty much a center-left party with highly pragmatical policies. The best example is the famous "infusion of capitalism" speech given by the great Mario Covas back in 1989, when he mentioned the urging need of more liberalism allied to social policies. That was pretty much the PSDB you had until 2002.

When the PT took over the federal government, it pretty much took over the center-left sweet spot the PSDB and it's older leaders occupied (perhaps a tad to the left than the PSDB used to be). Some will say the PSDB was a right wing party back then, I strongly reject this notion but I guess this depends on what one consider as left or right. Anyway, it's pretty clear PSDB members started to shift slowly to the right after 2002, slowly embracing economic liberalism less shyly and some conservative social policies (specially on law enforcement matters). This trend was accelerated in 2010 and 2012, when many toucans and close allies were elected under center-right platforms and policies, including Alckmin, Beto Richa, Aloysio Nunes, ACM Neto, etc. Alckmin is running a decidely center-right campaign this year (specially on law enforcement matters, where he's adopting a strong law and order speech) that's proving to be very successful.

Well, personally I always saw it this way: PSDB pretty much started as a classical social democratic party (including Covas supporting Lula against Collor in 1989, after not making it into the runoff). In 1990s, like many social democratic parties, PSBD embraced third way policy, as evident with FHQ famous statement of rejecting "outdated labels" such as "left" and "right". By 2000s, and with third way philosophy demise, the party simply could not shift back to the left, even if they wanted to, because there is simply not enough room.

I disagree. PSDB had never been a classical social democratic party. Unlike the European social democratic parties, PSDB had never been supported by organized labor. No big unions backed this party. PSDB was founded in 1988 by PMDB politicians unsatisfied with that party. In its early days, PSDB was a party of Congressmen and academics, not a party of interest groups of the society. Then, the interest group which became the base of the PSDB was big business and not big labor.
In the election of 1989, Covas supported Lula in the runoff not because he was against the neoliberal proposals of Collor (Covas supported privatization too), but because it was the first free presidential election after the military dictatorship, Covas and Lula were opponents of the dictatorship and Collor started his political career in the party that backed the dictatorship. Fernando Henrique Cardoso was against endorsing Lula, but at that time, Covas was more powerful in the party. After that, PSDB members, like Antônio Kandir, worked in Collor administration.
Of course, PSDB moved to the right in 1994, when it built a coalition with the conservative PFL to support Fernando Henrique Cardoso, and moved further to the right when it became the opposition party, after Lula had become the president.

PT looks like a classical social democratic party. When it was founded in 1980, it was a party of the marxist left, like the European social democratic parties founded 100 years before. Then, PT became a social democratic party. It is still on the left of European social democratic parties because PT did not go to the Third Way. It was going to the Third Way during Lula's first term (2003-2006) but moved a little bit to the left again in the second term. Both in the past, when PT was a radical left-wing party and in the present, when PT is a social democratic party, PT is supported by CUT, the biggest union of labor unions.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #290 on: September 29, 2014, 07:32:33 PM »

IBOPE has registered its last poll, which will be released Saturday, probably Saturday night during Jornal Nacional, Brazil's most watched news program. 3000 people will be polled.

All states will get at least one more IBOPE poll to be released between Thursday and Saturday. The most important states will get 3 polls, just like the national race. I'll post all last polls so that we can see on an average how accurate IBOPE really was this year.
Logged
RodPresident
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,157
Brazil


Political Matrix
E: -7.23, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #291 on: September 29, 2014, 08:20:25 PM »

Main theme today was homophobic rant by candidate Levy Fidelix (PRTB) at yesterday TV Record debate. After a question by Luciana Genro (PSOL), he said that "two equal people don't reproduce" and that "excretive system don't give birth". He proposed that straight majority should "defy" LGBT minority. OAB (Brazilian bar) is requesting that his registration to be banned.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #292 on: September 29, 2014, 08:27:54 PM »

Datafolha will release its last poll Saturday night, possibly during Jornal Nacional, possibly a little bit before. 17800 voters from 476 cities will be polled, making this one pretty much the ultimate poll.

Datafolha will also release state polls from São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Minas Gerais, Rio Grande do Sul, Paraná, Ceará, Pernambuco and the Federal District - pretty much the most important states.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #293 on: September 29, 2014, 08:42:15 PM »

The election gets more bizarre each passing day. Today Mark Ruffalo endorsed Marina Silva, releasing a video in Youtube in her favor. A few hours later, as he learned Marina flip-flopped on marriage equality, he withdrew his endorsement. So what should have been good news to Marina is now "even the incredible Hulk fled from Marina".
Logged
buritobr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,604


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #294 on: September 29, 2014, 08:57:00 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7OkDFzVrnc

This is the "other side of the coin".

Some TV broadcasts would like to invite only the three candidates who can win to participate in the debate. But the electoral law demands that candidates from all parties who have representatives in the Congress must be invited. So, not only Dilma, Marina and Aécio participate, but Luciana Genro, Eduardo Jorge, Pastor Everaldo and Levy Fidelix participate too.

In the first debate, when Luciana Genro and Eduardo Jorge supported gay marriage, legalization of abortion and legalization of marijuana, I saw many comments saying that the electoral law makes the debates more democratic, because issues that would never be discussed by the three major candidates could be discussed by the others and showed to millions of people. But if the law creates room for social liberal ideas, like the ones supported by Luciana Genro and Eduardo Jorge, it also creates room for stupid ideas. Being pro gay marriage is an opinion, being anti gay marriage is an opinion, expose hate to homossexuals is a crime.

I agree with the electoral law and I think that the "nanicos" should be allowed to participate too. But hate crimes should be punished.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #295 on: September 29, 2014, 09:12:20 PM »

The problem is the lack of a barrier clause. The 90's barrier clause was only ruled unconstitutional due to a technicality (it was a normal law and should have been a constitutional amendment). The problem is, no one has the necessary courage to do this anymore.

I do think the electoral process in Brazil is over-regulated, but this is just a consequence of a system where voting is mandatory. The electoral system is authoritarian in its essence.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #296 on: September 30, 2014, 09:40:40 AM »

Bovespa drops about 1,5% as the market anxiously waits for the next poll. Banks are the main losers today, specially Brazil's public owned bank, Banco do Brasil, which is already losing about 6%. Petrobras also keeps losing value.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #297 on: September 30, 2014, 05:15:03 PM »
« Edited: September 30, 2014, 05:18:24 PM by Paleobrazilian »

The race for the runoff gets slowly tighter according to Datafolha and perhaps if the trend continues Aecio will squeak by. Marina now performs just as poorly as Aecio in the runoff, so the tactical vote for Marina could well die now and this may just be what Aecio needs to make it to the runoff.

The large number on the right is the number of valid votes. That's the number that will really matter on Sunday.



Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #298 on: September 30, 2014, 05:46:34 PM »

Why is Marina collapsing? It must be more than just a bad debate performance.
Logged
Paleobrazilian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 767
Brazil


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #299 on: September 30, 2014, 05:53:59 PM »

Why is Marina collapsing? It must be more than just a bad debate performance.

Heavy attack ads from both Dilma and Aecio, greater media scrutiny, a poorly written election manifesto, questions about her (lack of) experience, 2 (3 depending on how you see her "Rede") party switches in about 5 years, the fact that many within the higher ranks of the PSB dislike her, the fact that the PSB has less money, ground support and grassroots networks than the PT and the PSDB, many flip-flops, and even a few lies about her record as Senator.

It was always gonna be a tough proposition for her to stay 10 points ahead of Dilma in a runoff, but I expected her to make it a very tight election. But she made way too many amateur mistakes. In fact, if she indeed loses reelection, this may well be remembered as an election she fumbled.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 34  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.068 seconds with 12 queries.