Brazil's conservative surge is a reminder that polling doesn't equal votes - and America's midterms remain an open contest.
Reports of the conservative movement’s demise in Brazil were premature. On Sunday, Flávio Bolsonaro finished ahead of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, while his Liberal Party substantially expanded its representation in Congress. The presidency still awaits an October 25 runoff, but the political comeback is already unmistakable.
For American Republicans confronting forecasts of a Democratic wave, Brazil offers encouragement. Elections belong to the people who vote, including those whose preferences pollsters struggle to capture and whose concerns political commentators sometimes underestimate.
Bolsonaro received 47.03 percent of valid votes to Lula’s 45.16 percent. The final Datafolha survey had measured Lula at 45 percent and Bolsonaro at 42 percent. It essentially captured the incumbent’s support while missing roughly five percentage points of his challenger’s eventual vote. An anticipated Lula lead became a Bolsonaro advantage.
That is consequential. A political movement that appeared to be trailing emerged with momentum, backed by millions of voters who wanted a different direction.
The congressional gains reinforced the message. The Liberal Party increased its lower-house representation from 98 to 121 seats and its Senate representation from 15 to 28. Even if Lula survives the runoff, he will confront a strengthened conservative opposition.
What motivated voters? Reporting identifies living costs, corruption and public insecurity as central concerns. These are immediate problems for people trying to support families or operate businesses. A government’s ideological reputation abroad cannot compensate for disappointment at home.
Glenn Greenwald’s criticism of commentators blaming voters contains a useful principle: citizens do not owe any party permanent loyalty. Recognizing a government’s accomplishments does not oblige someone to overlook its shortcomings. Political parties must keep earning support.
American Republicans should take that principle seriously, too. Families struggling with prices deserve acknowledgment and convincing answers. Optimism will be more persuasive when it begins with an honest account of what voters are experiencing.
But Republican difficulties do not make a Democratic landslide inevitable.
In the polling article supplied for this discussion, veteran Democratic pollster Celinda Lake identifies two possible weaknesses in favorable Democratic numbers: unusually strong projected youth turnout and depressed Republican participation. She questions whether both assumptions may be overstated.
That leaves Republicans an opening. Disappointment with the administration does not necessarily mean a Republican will stay home or vote Democratic. Opposition to Trump does not guarantee that a young respondent will participate in a midterm election.
Nor can demographic adjustments necessarily resolve every sampling problem. Pollsters may reach enough respondents of a particular age or education level while still missing political differences between those willing to answer and those who refuse. AAPOR found that American polling improved in 2024 but continued to underestimate Republican votes relative to Democratic votes.
The recent governor surveys also deserve proportionate interpretation. The supplied Times/Siena polling shows a substantial Democratic advantage in Iowa, but narrower leads in Texas, Ohio and Alaska. Those results establish opportunities for Democrats, not an accomplished sweep.
Brazil cannot tell us precisely how those American contests will finish. Its conservative challenger benefited from dissatisfaction with a left-wing incumbent. Republicans hold the White House here and face their own accountability. Trump also will not appear on November’s ballot. There is no defensible formula for subtracting Brazil’s polling error from American Democratic leads.
Nevertheless, Republicans have substantial work they can still do. Campaigns can reach irregular voters, improve participation and explain the consequences of congressional control. Candidates can address local concerns instead of allowing every contest to become a national referendum.
The opportunity is to convert frustration into engagement rather than resignation. Republican voters who believe the forecasts are too pessimistic have one effective answer: participate.
Bolsonaro has another election to win. American Republicans have theirs ahead, too. Brazil’s message is encouraging because it is concrete: conservative strength can exceed expectations, and political momentum can change when ballots replace predictions.
(Contributing writer, Brooke Bell)