156 points laurenth 1 hour ago 102 comments

matheusmoreira 1 hour ago | parent

Deeply unfortunate, but not entirely unexpected. Lula was allowed to do every "electoral crime" they barred Bolsonaro from doing in 2022. They even extended voting time, a move that directly benefiting him, and also ruled illegal back in 2022.

Gotta look on the bright side. Bolsonaro was closer to US interests than I'd like. If the elected right wing senate manages to at least impeach some supreme court justices next year, I'm going to be OK with this.

I submitted the news too and it got flagged:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50237256

epolanski 59 minutes ago | parent

Why unfortunate?

tomcam 58 minutes ago | parent

> Lula was allowed to do every "electoral crime" they barred Bolsonaro from doing in 2022. They even extended voting time, a move that directly benefiting him, and also ruled illegal back in 2022.

spolitry 49 minutes ago | parent

Letting cirixes vote in elections is bad?

thatsnogood123 55 minutes ago | parent

Bolsonaro-aligned mayors deliberately blocked busses from running that would take people to the polls in Lula-supporting neighborhoods. Emergency legal decisions allowed voting times to extend as a response to this. By the margin of votes, it wouldn't have mattered.

matheusmoreira 13 minutes ago | parent

Busses with a Lula insignia on it, which is an electoral crime.

lukan 58 minutes ago | parent

"They even extended voting time, a move that directly benefiting him"

Both candidates supported that decision.

bakies 56 minutes ago | parent

Both sides asked to extend the hours. The court took the action. I don't really know brazillian politics and what happened in the past but thought I'd point that out.

matheusmoreira 24 minutes ago | parent

Abstainees were thought to be the biggest source of new votes for Lula in the 2nd round of elections. I think such a move benefited Lula far more than it did Flávio.

It's also inconsistent with the court's own precedent. Extending voting hours was deemed illegal back in 2022. "Everybody had the chance to vote", said Alexandre de Moraes.

After Lula lost in the 1st round, suddenly it became legal again. The irony is not lost on me. That's the pattern with the leftist judges in the courts. The supreme court judge who decided it used to be Lula's own lawyer.

gtirloni 53 minutes ago | parent

> submitted the news too and it got flagged

Please review the HN guidelines:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

johntitor23 53 minutes ago | parent

Please don't share half the context.

Many cities had their mayor cancelling free public transportation and stopping people from going voting. Extending the time is a reaction, not a first action. Furthermore, the ask didn't come just from Lula's party, it came from both candidates [1].

2022 Brazil had the Federal Police Director actively interfering with transportation as well.

[1] - https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/eleicoes/o-que-diz-o-codigo-ele...

matheusmoreira 46 minutes ago | parent

Busses with a Lula insignia on it? That's an electoral crime, and probably why they were stopped from circulating. Just yet another one to the list.

They called for extension back in 2022 too, and it was ruled illegal. "Everybody had the chance to vote", said Alexandre de Moraes.

subw00f 53 minutes ago | parent

Closer to US interests? What a joke. Better luck next time, I guess.

spolitry 51 minutes ago | parent

This is a very confusing comment. Most on this side don't know the insider informing the Brazilian elections, and we only know the public news

Can you explain?

You are right winger but don't like the Brazilian right wing aligning with the US right wing, but do like the politicians who are aligned with the US right wing?

matheusmoreira 37 minutes ago | parent

I'm kinda trying to move past left/right labels. I'll try to explain.

Bolsonaro generally supports privatizing Brazilian state companies and selling them off to foreigners. I don't want that. Especially not to the US and Israel.

Lula on the other hand is better aligned with China, which is also what I want.

Lula and myself are aligned on these two points. So this outcome is not entirely bad for me.

The problem I have with Lula is his party's obnoxious taxation, lack of a real plan for reindustrialization, continuous defense of criminals, and most importantly, his total domination of the supreme court. I voted for the right specifically to see those judges impeached and imprisoned, because I absolutely oppose everything they did in 2022, far more than I ever opposed Lula himself. I'm of the opinion that presidents and elections barely matter anymore, because it's the supreme court that runs the country. It's the Venezuela governance model: president appoints god-like supreme court judges and rules monocratically through them.

The 1st round this month was such an upset not because of Bolsonaro but because of the senate. They are the ones who can impeach supreme court judges, and when Brazil unexpectedly elected a right wing majority in the senate, it struck true fear into the court. This was our chance to completely wipe out that court and forever change the history of this country, like Bukele did for El Salvador.

While in the end the necessary victory didn't materialize, Brazilian senate is still absolute majority right wing now, and they could still impeach those judges. I'm not going to hold out hope for that anymore, but if I see at least one judge bite the dust I'll still call it a major win.

free_bip 47 minutes ago | parent

The amount of mental gymnastics people will do to support fascist dictator wannabes is truly insane. For your sake I hope you find reality.

lenkite 46 minutes ago | parent

It was extremely amusing. Brazilian election law generally sets 5 p.m. Brasília time as the deadline for closing polls. The judge who made the emergency ruling to pause counting and extend voting hours by 2 hours was Cristiano Zanin Martins - Lula's former personal attorney. The same guy who Lula nominated to the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil in June 2023.

anderber 40 minutes ago | parent

Both candidates agreed to it. Please stop.

canadiantim 36 minutes ago | parent

Yeah it’s alarming how much HN users are willing to support corruption so long as it’s their preferred candidate doing it. Really is all just tribalism to most posters in this thread so far

armchairhacker 41 minutes ago | parent

What are the other crimes? Extending time would rarely be bad, and it seems both candidates approved it.

matheusmoreira 17 minutes ago | parent

Back in 2022, Lula's party used to be against Bolsonaro's "digital militias". They engaged everybody they had in the superior and supreme courts in order to censor it all. It was disgusting.

This time around, some guy in Lula's party created "Lula's Army", a channel with millions of people in it. Suddenly, it was fine.

They used to cry about "fake news" and call for censorship at every opportunity, and they'd get it because they own the courts. Now they were the ones spreading "fake news" of all sorts. Did they get censored? Nah.

Censorship in Brazil is unconstitutional, by the way. Political censorship is doubly so. It doesn't matter, because they own the supreme court.

There are now laws in Brazil, there is only what the supreme court wants. Whatever they write on a piece of paper becomes law, and police obeys it. They are the true seat of power in this country.

762236 14 minutes ago | parent

What's sad is you're down voted for your political opinion, causing HN to classify your comments as low quality, which reduces the amount you can contribute. The Lula supporters and anti-Musk people are exhibiting authoritarian behaviors, and they are too blind to see it. I stick to X for rewarding conversations.

matheusmoreira 10 minutes ago | parent

I'm used to it by now.

Debating politics with the Chinese on X taught me a lot and allowed me to move past left/right labels. My personal politics turned out to be a mix between what people call left and right wing ideologies.

abdelhousni 57 minutes ago | parent

Fascism loses, maybe there is hope for the rest of the world.

brazukadev 57 minutes ago | parent

Really unexpected.

Polymarket was like 80% Bolsonaro Jr to 20% Lula 7pm, 7:15 it changed to 60% Lula. There were multiple reports in the news websites about it favoring Bolsonaro which itself probably made some people vote for him.

I'm quite happy with the result tho. Let's see how the far right opposition will take this loss. I'm already expecting the worse.

mulderc 52 minutes ago | parent

Maybe these prediction markets are less useful than has been claimed.

medellin 51 minutes ago | parent

They are good at some markets but they don’t understand latam and especially Brazilian politics in the least so whatever makes it into the US news drives the market although it is normally wrong

smuhakg 49 minutes ago | parent

If he has an 80% chance to win that means Polymarket will be "wrong" 20% of the time. And 80% seems fair given he was leading in the polls by a razor thin but consistent margin.

jeffbee 36 minutes ago | parent

Polymarket isn't binary so you are understating how wrong they were. Polymaket gives outcomes as percentage odds and less than 12 hours ago they had Bolsonaro by 5-to-1.

axus 44 minutes ago | parent

Maybe it's useful for people spending money to present the odds they wish for?

furyofantares 34 minutes ago | parent

20% happens about 1 in 5 times. I know that's snarky wording but 20% shots come though constantly in daily life.

I think as humans we are really bad at intuition about probabilities, and it being an election only makes it much worse. I don't think anyone is consciously conflating these with poll numbers but percentages of voters are the numbers we see a lot more than prediction markets, and 80% is idunno an 80% chance of getting between 50% and 54% of the vote or something.

alpha_squared 29 minutes ago | parent

It's not a 'prediction market', it's a gambling market. It's far more accurate to say 80% of gamblers were convinced Bolsanaro would win than to say there's an 80% likelihood he would win. It's not measuring likelihood as it's untethered from things that impact the actual results. Obscuring it basic gambling with the word 'prediction' doesn't change the fact that's naked gambling at the end of the day.

augusto-moura 34 minutes ago | parent

They were never useful for the results, just for market expectation, which is never the same as real chances of something happening

medellin 52 minutes ago | parent

Not really. If you follow anyone who has been covering latam for a long time they had odds of this election at a coinflip.

bryanlarsen 37 minutes ago | parent

A 20% chance of Lula winning is still a real chance of winning. A standard rule of thumb would require 2 standard deviations aka 5% aka p<0.05 for relative certainty.

estebank 34 minutes ago | parent

If you think this result with those odds is unexpected, you must have never played X-Com :)

platevoltage 33 minutes ago | parent

We saw how they took it last time.

subdude 56 minutes ago | parent

Heartening after all the interference the US and its oligarchs threw at this election.

nemomarx 53 minutes ago | parent

This is probably a good support case for run-off elections being beneficial.

wraptile 21 minutes ago | parent

Ranked voting and runoff systems seem to have nothing but positives yet adoption is still lacking for some reason.

lotsofpulp 16 minutes ago | parent

First past the post is beneficial for establishment parties.

xvedejas 15 minutes ago | parent

Depends on which ranked system. IRV has a lot of issues that other systems (like STAR, my personal preference in voting system, or Condorcet methods for instance) address much better. Non-monotonicity in particular seems like a bad property of a voting system, so I'm confused that IRV is so popular recently.

thimabi 51 minutes ago | parent

Once again, a clear anti-Bolsonaro vote from the majority of the electorate. Lula won because he got last-minute support from the moderates and even some right-wingers. It certainly does not feel like a victory of the left.

Now he will face a much bigger opposition in Congress and therefore will have to find a middle ground.

I expect his policies to move even further to the right. This might pave the way for his vice-president Alckmin, a historical right-winger, to run in the 2030 elections — likely against São Paulo’s governor Tarcísio de Freitas, also a right-winger and considered more moderate than the Bolsonaros despite being associated with them.

(reposting my own comment from a related thread)

nemomarx 50 minutes ago | parent

The margin is a little close, so is the Senate expected to be deadlocked? Or is there a coalition that can form between moderates and the left?

thimabi 25 minutes ago | parent

I wouldn’t say deadlocked but the coalition between moderates and the left isn’t a given. There are many centrist parties who will likely alternate between supporting and opposing the government depending on the issue.

runarberg 48 minutes ago | parent

I would call this a defensive victory. The left’s best chance was a 0-0 draw, so they put everyone in defense and managed to prevent the right from scoring a victory goal.

nielsbot 39 minutes ago | parent

moving to the right would be a trap. (cf. Dem party vs Trump) The left must instead build an anti-right wing narrative. People vote on material benefits so delivering more of those should be top priority—I think Trumps slump in the US proves that.

supjeff 50 minutes ago | parent

The one good thing about the current system is that shitheads like musk can spend half-a-billion to buy elections, but the people still have the final say.

colordrops 46 minutes ago | parent

That's assuming no gerrymandering and funny business at the polls.

p-e-w 30 minutes ago | parent

Gerrymandering doesn’t change the fact that the voters decide the results. Most electoral systems already give unequal weight to different votes based on district sizes etc., so gerrymandering is only a change of degree and intention, not of how democracy fundamentally works.

afavour 27 minutes ago | parent

> Gerrymandering doesn’t change the fact that the voters decide the results.

Well it does change which voters decide the results. A lot of electoral systems seek to constantly redress imbalance by having impartial bodies redraw district lines as populations shift. It is a shame the US does not. Gerrymandering is fundamentally undemocratic.

andersonpico 18 minutes ago | parent

gerrymandering is not possible with Brasil electoral system

xoa 13 minutes ago | parent

>gerrymandering

I don't know the specifics of Brazil's system, but at least in the US gerrymandering has nothing to do with the Presidency or Senate, only the House. It's also not without risky. Gerrymandering is bad, but it doesn't change the totals of votes; it attempts to reapportion "excess" votes yielding a large win margin in one area to give winning, but necessarily smaller, margins in more areas. Amongst other challenges though that smaller margin means if there is a wave then a gerrymander can turn into a "dummymander" where previously safe districts get flipped.

>funny business

This is actually pretty dang hard in anything but a total sham, and even then is at least obvious it happened. Some timy fiddling at the margins may be possible to sneak through, and yeah some elections that might make the difference. But that can't counter any serious victory. The more common technique seems to be trying to suppress the vote. But as well as also not being trivial it also too risks backfiring by motivating people much harder. There is a lot of human psychology around "loss", people often absolutely hate things being taken from them even if they were complacent about having them.

brunoborges 6 minutes ago | parent

Brazilian here. President wins by popular vote. Period.

Must win by 50% plus 1 of all valid votes on Round 1. If not, 1st and 2nd most voted go for Round 2 a few weeks later. Then, 50%+1 again of all valid votes.

dvdyzag 44 minutes ago | parent

wasn't musk heavily quoted in physics and tech books until his politics became center stage?

ryan_n 41 minutes ago | parent

Serious question: why would he be "heavily" quoted in physics books? I didn't think he was a physicist, is he?

jeffbee 38 minutes ago | parent

We need to get to the bottom of why people believe stuff like that, and fix it.

hackyhacky 36 minutes ago | parent

You're fighting a losing war against human laziness and gullibility.

lazide 36 minutes ago | parent

Reality distortion field. Same reason Jobs is held up as an amazing visionary.

p-e-w 27 minutes ago | parent

That assumption has certainly been vindicated, considering what happened to Apple after he was gone.

datsci_est_2015 18 minutes ago | parent

A 5 trillion dollar company?

georgemcbay 31 minutes ago | parent

epihelix 12 minutes ago | parent

It's not limited to textbooks or academic publications, or based on any context whatsoever, but an ngram search actually suggests there's a much larger musk stain on recent published literature than I'd ever thought possible:

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Elon+Musk%2CAl...

Make of that what you will.

so-gala-massey 10 minutes ago | parent

I guess some people still like to troll? Or are so dumb they’ve obviously never even cracked a physic text? I’m hoping it’s just old fashioned trolling.

coeneedell 40 minutes ago | parent

Not really. He had a really good PR person that made people think this, but most technologists are focused on, y’know, actual technology

ceejayoz 37 minutes ago | parent

You’re making the claim. Back it up.

Thrymr 35 minutes ago | parent

no

sergiotapia 27 minutes ago | parent

platevoltage 22 minutes ago | parent

Wait, what did he do besides be happy that a fascist isn't in charge of the future of the Amazon?

MattDamonSpace 23 minutes ago | parent

So can we stop panicking about money in elections or

mahmoudhossam 17 minutes ago | parent

No.

Ygg2 17 minutes ago | parent

Not really. A biased coin doesn't need to be biased 99% (to 1%) for it to matter.

Telaneo 14 minutes ago | parent

Absolutely the fuck not.

georgemcbay 12 minutes ago | parent

No, this much money in politics is still very dangerous.

A major reason it isn't working for now is because Donald Trump is, in addition to being a corrupt autocrat, incredibly incompetent. We shouldn't have to rely on that.

johnnyanmac 5 minutes ago | parent

[delayed]

762236 19 minutes ago | parent

It's amazing how people keep forgetting that when they use a certain behavior, or justify a certain action, they give the same privilege to their opponent. Thus you are the shithead.

hinow 49 minutes ago | parent

Parabéns Lula! Uffaaaaaa

bguberfain 48 minutes ago | parent

This was the first time I saw a major mainstream media outlet prominently feature a statistical predictive model live during the vote count (and it was spot on): https://www.estadao.com.br/politica/eleicoes/em-tempo-real-p...

zorked 21 minutes ago | parent

Indeed, Rodrigo Mahlmeister's model was absolutey impressive. It even predicted the inflection points incredibly well.

soneca 36 minutes ago | parent

I have a learning a bit more related to tech from this election. Centrally organized, cohesive, persistent online engagement wins elections.

It won for Bolsonaro whose campaign nailed it in 2018. It didn’t win in 2022 because he was completely bad in dealing with pandemics (mocking people dying and saying he had nothing to do with it being president).

Now, Lula’s campaign was absolutely dead during the whole time. Until it lost in the legislative by a mile and in the President run had a partial loss in the first round. Then the campaign lit up after the partial upset.

Janones, an energetic young guy elected to legislative with good online presence led the campaign. He achieved creating a WhatsApp group with 11 million people called “Lula’s army”. He would give the directions and the people would obey almost blindly.

The interwebs (basically WhatsApp + Instagram) got flooded with this top to bottom Lula’s campaign.

The first round results made Bolsonaro very favorite. Lula victory was a huge upset. I put the merit in this incessant social media campaign.

The thing is: “centrally planned cohesive campaign” looks a lot like a cult. The point of the campaign is not critical thought or argumentation, it is incessant messaging. Think fandoms.

Bolsonaro voters pejorative nickname from past campaigns was they were all “cattle”. Because that is how they behaved online. Ironically, what worked for Lula voters this year was they behaving like “cattle”. Just reposting and following this central orders on what to post, what to say, what to dress.

The thing is, it works. Cult-like fandoms work in elections. The right won a few elections like this in the world. In Brazil, the left just learned how to do it was well.

The more mindless posters a politician has following their campaign HQ orders, the more votes they have.

brazukadev 34 minutes ago | parent

Absolutely. Janones won this election. Let's see if he will be part of the government or will be sidelined again.

swingandamiss 20 minutes ago | parent

I truly hate what HN has become. It has all the expected comments about Musk, fascism, etc. This is exactly why I stopped going to reddit.

aliasxneo 12 minutes ago | parent

Just a friendly gesture that there's still independents/non-partisan's here. We're a dying breed, but it seems to the the inevitable outcome when politics becomes a religion.

fn-mote 15 minutes ago | parent

As optimistic as I want to be, this is the fourth term for a president?? That cannot be good for democracy.

It can be better than the alternatives and still not good.