The results of the recent municipal elections in Brazil were interpreted in distinct ways by the different actors involved. For some analysts, they clearly signalled a weakness of the 2018 far-right wave and of president Bolsonaro’s ability to successfully endorse candidates. For others, they indicated a low-risk voting preference: the restricted campaign due to Covid-19 allegedly favoured the re-election of mayors and city councillors as well as of candidates affiliated to well-established political parties. Indeed, the strengthening of several right and centre-right parties prompted some to assert the return of the ‘old politics’, or of politics proper, as opposed to the anti-political tendency of the last presidential election. Yet others pointed out that the ‘old politics’ were always centre stage, even if rebranded as anti-establishment. Analyses also emphasized the changing dynamics within the centre-left and left parties, suggesting that the Workers’ Party (PT) is no longer the single most important player within the left, while highlighting the unprecedented number of LGBTQI+ candidates - a record number of which was elected.
Members and allies of the Brazilian government also received the results with mixed reactions: Filipe Martins, foreign policy advisor to the President, posted a long thread on Twitter in which he urged the ‘right’ – read, the government and its allies – to learn from its mistakes and engage in self-criticism. Mostly addressing a self-denominated conservative public, he reminded them that the 2018 win was the result of a favourable socio-political conjuncture, gradually constructed since 2013. Re-uniting around a common goal, Martins continued, and having a party affiliation to build a meaningful and lasting relationship with voters are essential steps to re-election in 2022. While Martins stressed the need for strategic internal re-appraisal, members of the government’s support base in the Congress, such as Bia Kicis and Carla Zambelli, were quick to raise suspicion about the legitimacy of the result, suggesting that it may be fraudulent.
President Bolsonaro’s reaction, on the other hand, was threefold: first, he declared a ‘historic defeat’ for the left; then, he minimised his role in the non-election of candidates he had endorsed; and, finally, he repeated the unfounded allegation that the electronic ballot boxes are not entirely reliable and called for the return of print ballots. While ‘electoral denial’ is not a new item in Bolsonaro’s conspiracist arsenal, it has made a forceful comeback among far-right groups in Brazil since the US elections last November. This rather eclectic response is consistent with the Brazilian president’s more general tactic to present himself as either the winner over, or a victim of persecution by, powerful and sinister institutions and stakeholders, and hence never take responsibility over a loss, failure, or neglect. Yet, while he doubled down on conspiracy theories and strived to illustrate victory, he also appeared to lend an ear – albeit more discreetly – to Martins – one of the government’s ideological hardliners, a proud disciple of writer Olavo de Carvalho, and an admirer of Steve Bannon.
