It's All Over But the Shouting

Lula appears to have been reelected and whatever Geraldo Alckmin did appears to have seriously backfired. This is from Jornal do Brasil with my translation following:

Com 93,42% das urnas apuradas, Lula tem 2 milhões de votos a mais que em 2002                                                                                                                                                                               
RIO - O presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) já tem 1 milhão de votos a mais do que em 2002. Na primeira vez que foi eleito Lula obteve 52.793.364 votos, 61,3%. Com 93,42% das urnas e 118.545.963 votos apurados, o petista soma 54.940.423 votos, 60,72%. Geraldo Alckmin (PSDB) tem 35.447.103 de votos, ou 39,28%. Em 2002, o tucano José Serra teve 38,7 votos e cerca dois milhões a menos que Alckmin.

No segundo turno entre Serra e Lula, a abstenção foi de 20,5%, equivalentes a 23.589.188 votos. Na última parcial, a abstenção estava em 18,70%, equivalente 22.171.330 votos.

Por enquanto, os votos brancos 1.295.655; nulos são 4,76%, ou 4.591.452 votos. Em 2002, votos brancos foram 1.727.760 e nulos, 3.772.138.

With More Than 93.42% of the Ballot Boxes Counted, Lula Has 2 Million More Votes Than in 2002

RIO - President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) already has 1 million votes more than he had in 2002 [ed note: ?!?!?!]  The first time he was elected Lula received 52,793,364 votes, 61.3%. With 93.42% of the ballot boxes and 118,545,963 votes counted, the PT candidate totals 54,940,423 votes, 60.72%, Geraldo Alckmin (PSDB) has 35,447,103 votes, or 39.28%. In 2002, PSDB candidate Jose Serra had 38.7%  of the votes and about a million less than Alckmin.

In the second round between Serra and Lula, abstentions were 20.5% equal to 23,589,188 votes. At last count, abstentions were 18.7% equal to 22,171,330 votes.

As of now, the blank ballots were 1,295,655; spoiled ballots were 4.76%, or 4,591,452 votes. In 2002 blank ballots were 1,727,760 and spolied ballots were 3,772,138.

It certainly appears that Alckmin's plan to attack Lula on allegations of corruption backfired miserably, especially as it appeared he offered very little as to what he would do should he be elected.

I believe that commenter Wronski called it accurately with this comment:

There was a lot of mudslinging in this campaign, but the mud flung by Alckmin (corruption, where the dossie money came from, Lula is responsible, etc) did not stick, while the petista mud did (Alckmin will privitize oxygen, cut social spending, etc.).

I think Alckmin made a strategic error by going after Lula so agressively in the first debate, he came off as a bully. At the same time, he keeps talking about lowering taxes, debt and whatnot, and people are bound to wonder were he will get the money from. Since he did not have the balls to state exactly what kind of cuts he would make (none, apparently, the money-raining season being just about to begin), people assumed the worst, prodded by PT.

I think that John Fitzpatrick calls much of it right here, although I don't necessarily agree with this:

Finally, one of the reasons why Lula is so keen on keeping big companies like Petrobras and Banco do Brasil under control is that they provide great opportunities for political patronage. People can be appointed to the board of directors and to executive management positions on political not technical grounds. Once these politicians are in place, they can hire and fire who they want and provide sinecures for their allies, friends and relatives. More importantly, they have access to the company´s cash. State-owned companies were at the heart of the "bribes for votes" and have been linked to the "bloodsuckers" scandal and its latest development, the alleged attempt by the PT to buy information from corrupt businessmen to smear the PSDB's Jose Serra, recently elected governor of São Paulo.

It's certainly not unique to Lula, nor has Fitzpatrick really supplied any evidence for this. As he alludes earlier in the article, it is not just the left, but also nationalists who frown upon privatizations. I agree with the argument that the privatization of CVRD was a huge success and Fitzpatrick supplies plenty of proof that it was.

Maria Silva Bastos Marques comparison of the P & L figures for 1992 with 2005, are truly in the apples and oranges realm. In 1992, Brazil was suffering under Plano Collor and hyperinflation. 2005 is hardly a fair benchmark year to compare it to.

Lula will have four more years. What he will make of them remains to be seen. He will probably have to do some serious fence-mending both within and outside his party. He will have to build coalitions for whatever he wants to accomplish as he doesn't have enough votes among the PT in Congress.

Comments

[Anna Fagundes]

"Serious fence-mending"? Paul, Lula will have to rebuild the whole fence. He has sent out to the frying pan nearly everyone who was near to him in order to save his neck. Now that he's been given a second term, he'll have to tone down his voice, lest he ends up a "lame duck", as the Americans say...