Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
I was seeing the reports from the first pass which said it was almost guaranteed that Lula would not win because of what the results of the first were. I wonder what caused that prediction to fail.

I am glad the son of a failed coup organizer and a trump puppet didn't get elected and am hopeful for Brazils ability to self govern. Breaking free of US financial monopolies (credit cards) gives me hope they'll continue to produce and innovative into a healthier and competitive world market, but I am also tired of Lula being at the helm and wish someone else could step up and take the reigns. When someone stays in power for so long in a democracy it makes me suspicious of the legitimacy of their power. Are they popular because they are good for the country or are they popular because they have the right people with power, influence, and money on their side.

loading story #50239025
loading story #50240353
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...
Indeed, Rodrigo Mahlmeister's model was absolutey impressive. It even predicted the inflection points incredibly well.
loading story #50239495
loading story #50239931
It was anyway a lose-lose situation. I hope to see Brazil free from 'bolsopetismo'/'bolsolulismo' (as some of we call this disease to keep Bolsonaro and Lula or their parties on the presidential room) soon, but here we go for another 4 years...
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.

loading story #50238684
loading story #50238441
loading story #50238209
loading story #50238920
loading story #50238202
It's very situationally dependent. Term limits stop bad politicians doing too much damage, they also stop good politicians getting too much momentum on their side.
loading story #50238293
loading story #50238259
loading story #50238808
It’s good for Putin. He and Lula are allies, and their friendship goes way back.
This is probably a good support case for run-off elections being beneficial.
Ranked voting and runoff systems seem to have nothing but positives yet adoption is still lacking for some reason.
No electoral method is perfect and there are problems with Instant runoff ranked ballots. Look up "Favourite Betrayal" as a problem where ranking your most favourite incorrectly can accidentally result in your least favourite winning.

Of course just because there are technically flaws, doesn't mean it's not an improvement over the status quo.

Instant Runoff Ranked ballots are particularly well suited for electing a single position like a Mayor or President. Given that it's still a majoritarian system like First Pass the Post, it's a much more questionable system to use for other things like electing a parliament.

I think IRV at least has fairly unpredictable failure cases, which means they can't be exploited.

I remember seeing a 2D chart representing voter preferences on the X and Y axis, coloured by who wins under those preferences (and some symmetry-breaking assumptions). Some systems showed clear biases towards certain outcomes. IRV had a pretty symmetric shape but with a splotch in the middle that was a random jumble of different colours - an unpredictable, chaotic outcome.

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.
First past the post is beneficial for establishment parties.
Indeed. It tends to reinforce a two-party system. Anyone who votes third-party gets accused of 'wasting' their vote.

Preferential/ranked choice voting allows people to vote third-party while still expressing a preference for one of the majors.

loading story #50240278
loading story #50240099
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.

loading story #50238732
loading story #50237890
Janones was not leading a cult, this is just absurd. He was not telling people what to believe or how to behave AT ALL - he was just giving directions on what to do on social media to win the elections. Bolsonarism on the other hand is 100% a cult, from the beginning.
loading story #50238192
{"deleted":true,"id":50238647,"parent":50238557,"time":1792984530,"type":"comment"}
Are humans still involved in summarizing? Why is "What you need to know" missing the vote count even though the title is about votes?
loading story #50239664
loading story #50239972
loading story #50239061
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)

i don't know why you were downvoted. any turn to the moderation/center seems good news to me. those crazy swings between extremes left or right are just bad. i have never voted for both bolsonaro neither lula and crave for something closer to the center.

lula is a little less crazy (compared to bolsonaro), likely not anti-science, preserves the amazon, seems to care about keeping the same constituition and so on, but he heaves his hand when it comes to (mostly populist) spending, like there's no tomorrow.

he thinks he is helping the poor, but it is just for short term. so much public debt, in a few years everyone, rich or poor, will have pay the price, with interest. people that likes him usually say they don't like milei, but his incredible debt build up is actually a future-milei magnet.

also, after so much terms and "custo brazil" ("Brazilian (Business) Cost Burden"?) still prohibitive, the country never goes up from its terrible positions in making business rankings. one can just not hope he does anything better now after so much terms. his spending is too demand biased.

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?
Legislative branch in Brazil never deadlocks. Coalitions are a very natural part of our democracy.
Yeah, they will just make deals. Seriously doubt there will be a deadlock. Hope they at least manage to impeach the supreme court justices, which is what we elected them for.
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.
Senate is very right wing.
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.
Nobody wants to see them cut taxes from the rich or reduce employers rights. The popular "right" in Brazil wants taxes to be easier to pay, judges not to decide based on who is asking, and clear rules on what you can or can't do.

Also, nobody can beat Dilma on cutting taxes from the rich.

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.
Fascism loses, maybe there is hope for the rest of the world.
[flagged]
Who is we? Bolsonaro supporters?
Can you define fascism?
Anything not left wing is fascism. What I don't like is fascism. Not being a heckin decent human being is fascism. Loving the government too much is fascism but so is hating it too much.
https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
So the anti-fascist USSR and the Nazis overlapped by about 80-90%.
It's almost like the USSR was, in fact, fascist.
Fails criteria 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. So that is 7 out of 14 = 50%.

USSR was famously anti-religion (criteria 8) and pro labor (criteria 9 and 10) so thinking USSR shared 80-90% with Nazis is kind of laughable.

Pro labor is when the government makes it illegal for you to switch jobs or quit.
"Lula's re-election will strengthen Brazil's ties with Russia, Brazilian Workers Party congressman Reimont Otoni told TASS"

The world is more complex than "fascist" vs "communist"

Bolsonaro was also friendly towards Russia. Any president will be. Brazil depends on their fertilizers.
So what?! Nobody is saying otherwise. But PT vastly misrepresents how close it is to fascists and dictators. Love them, but hate to publicize them.
Why is it that this a concern to you but it's not a concern when the US and European powers align themselves with Saudi Arabia and Qatar?
I get that BRICS is world-domination wise scary to the US, but I don't really think the rest of the world fears that sans the US's warmongering.
Tbh don’t really care which side is right (some of Lula's politics I like and other not). I’m just pointing out the mental gymnastics HN goes through to paint one group as “fascist,” while completely ignoring the grey areas that don’t fit their cleancut worldview.
None of the things you mentioned have anything to do with whether or not a candidate is fascist. No “mental gymnastics” are needed.
I don't know enough about their available options to know how bad this is.
Are you taking this single congressman's word as fact?
https://www.barrons.com/news/lula-calls-to-strengthen-strate...

Literally Lula said as much

"We are interested in discussing the defence area, the space area, the scientific and technological area, the education area, and especially, the energy issue area," Lula said.

Only if you beat the fascists. Otherwise it gets real black-and-white real fast
{"deleted":true,"id":50237986,"parent":50237485,"time":1792978567,"type":"comment"}
{"deleted":true,"id":50237854,"parent":50237485,"time":1792977528,"type":"comment"}
Heartening after all the interference the US and its oligarchs threw at this election.
Parabéns Lula! Uffaaaaaa
I am not from Brazil, nor am I closely following its politics, but I would like to pose a genuine question: in a modern liberal democracy, doesn’t a four-term presidency represent too much power concentrated in one person?
loading story #50239016
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.
Interestingly the current "lets stop corporations from spending money on elections" that's popular in several states - wouldn't directly touch Musk because he can just spend the money directly.

I don't think "Oooh. Scary muslims!" works any less well if it's required to say "Elon Musk" rather than "American Apple Pie Goodness PAC" or whatever.

It might make a difference for smaller donors, especially if they're more sensitive about their personal PR.

The US is going to need a constitutional amendment to undo the Citizens United decision. Unlimited money in politics is anything but free speech.
That's assuming no gerrymandering and funny business at the polls.
gerrymandering is not possible with Brasil electoral system
loading story #50238224
>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 risk. 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.

loading story #50238104
loading story #50238135
loading story #50238288
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.
loading story #50237938
So can we stop panicking about money in elections or
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 next time.

loading story #50238336
Absolutely the fuck not.
Nope. Money still buys votes. It's just that Musk is so opaquely unpopular outside of the US that it negates his riches. Which really says something.
He's also very unpopular in the US
Not unpopular enough to tank Tesla sales (like in other countries) or not be pubic enemy #1 after literally stealing America's government data.

He did screw up Twitter/X enough that a new competitor managed to make a blip on the map, though. So that leads some credence.

EV sales are not a great metric to judge musk sentiments, consider the Tesla drivers who put various bumper stickers on

Tesla is the only EV company in the US making a good product. People also like the techieness. Foreign manufactures like Hyundai (what I drive, preferred less tech and real buttons) have tariffs and such applied to them. BYD would wreck them all if allowed.

Not really. A biased coin doesn't need to be biased 99% (to 1%) for it to matter.
https://x.com/AlexanderSoros/status/2114508265643983067

Need I say more?

Yes, please say more, I have no idea what you're saying.
Wait, what did he do besides be happy that a fascist isn't in charge of the future of the Amazon?
There's a near infinite amount of ways to try to understand why right wing people deeply disagree with the soros family and the way they destroy countries. Try to find out for yourself.

I try to understand why communists love lula the same way.

OK. So name some of the infinite ways.
HN isn't the place for this kind of stuff. But, clear as day Alex Soros loves Lula and his positions and mission. Go from there.
What would be the next step in understanding?
wasn't musk heavily quoted in physics and tech books until his politics became center stage?
Serious question: why would he be "heavily" quoted in physics books? I didn't think he was a physicist, is he?
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.

I don't understand how to filter this to physics books
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.
We need to get to the bottom of why people believe stuff like that, and fix it.
It's money.

If you have a lot of money and you've managed to stay out of prison, people are generally ready to believe good things about you and want to be in your good graces. If you pay people to continually say good things about you and manage your media appearances for you, there will generally be a lot of impact to that. You're just telling people what they're primed to believe. A lot of people will fluff up your image for free just because they're hoping for patronage.

Musk has a BA in physics that was awarded a couple years after he says he says he completed his studies. Unlike CPSC, leaving a physics program early robs you of some pretty crucial stuff. You generally don't see a lot of rockstar physicists leaving university early to join startups. Despite Musk posing as a rocket scientist, engineering guru, etc., there's no evidence he's one of the scientific or engineering minds behind Tesla or SpaceX's work. He's just a money guy.

The general rule for money guys is that the closer you are to the money, the more of it you can get. This is why CEO's are paid outrageous sums. Musk is the closest guy to the money at his companies, and his one true gift seems to be "getting close" to politicians in order to get the public's money, which Tesla and SpaceX have received gob-smacking amounts of.

If you want a laugh, go look up the episode of Dan Carlin's Hardcore History addendum where he brought Musk on. Carlin typically interviews authors of history books, so why Musk? Why indeed! During this episode, it comes out that Musk used to have models of WWII planes but clearly knows absolutely nothing about history. Despite this, he makes every effort to sound like he does. This is the sort of exposure $$$ gets you but, sometimes, you miss the mark.

You're fighting a losing war against human laziness and gullibility.
{"deleted":true,"id":50238109,"parent":50237849,"time":1792979478,"type":"comment"}
Reality distortion field. Same reason Jobs is held up as an amazing visionary.
That assumption has certainly been vindicated, considering what happened to Apple after he was gone.
A 5 trillion dollar company?
That produces the blandest corporate safe slop.
You’re making the claim. Back it up.
{"deleted":true,"id":50238071,"parent":50237811,"time":1792979131,"type":"comment"}
Not really. He had a really good PR person that made people think this, but most technologists are focused on, y’know, actual technology
[flagged]
{"dead":true,"deleted":true,"id":50238207,"parent":50238177,"time":1792980194,"type":"comment"}
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.
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.
In current times only cowards and deadbeats are non partisan.
Non-partisan doesn't mean lack of engagement or action. Maybe that's why there's so much confusion here.
Buddy, ICE is chasing down and killing US citizens. Musk is openly supporting European neo-Nazis. The US tech sector is supporting the genocide of Palestinians, and interfering with foreign elections.
See, the problem is that each side has moved so far to the extreme that any middle of the road comment is perceived as supporting the other side. But thanks for the demonstration, I guess.
A middle of the road comment would be "we need taxes, but not too high" or "children shouldn't be going hungry, but very sadly we can't afford to feed them from the city budget". What's actually being responded to above is the complete lack of a comment.
Swing and a miss buddy. The point is that big tech is political by its own choice, and you have to be extremely ignorant to look past that.
No, you just blatantly assumed none of those things mattered to me. You do realize you can have morals and opinions but also be non-partisan, right? Of course big tech is political, I completely agree. But you never asked me that question. Which again, really just keeps driving my point home. It's rabid.
The parties have morals and opinions which are quite diametrically opposed. If you have any at all, then you necessarily align with one or the other - being in the exact middle is an extreme rarity (and also quite a stupid position, because it implies you can't decide whether it's better to have free healthcare or to torture immigrants). Most people who claim to be in the exact middle are in fact not.
The left: we need free healthcare and less market capture.

The right: we need to torture immigrants and more market capture.

The center: I can't decide between these two equally appealing, equally moral options.

This is a naive perspective. Both extremes are losing people to independents for a reason. What we want is less of this and more of civil discourse. Most people are not tuned into the details, are focusing on their family, and vote based on how their wallet feels and the things they hear 2-3 weeks before the election.

Perhaps if the far left and hard right didn't dominate primaries (many reasons for this), we could have less extreme candidates in November. But it is what it is until we start having civil conversations with our friends, family, neighbors, and community. We could be having conversations about how we improve our democracy.

You comment lends to being part of the problem. Please stop demeaning everyone with blanket statements.

As an independent volunteering with Indivisible, my main effort has been to moderate the members on the far left.

This person seem content with summarizing the entire choice of a political party into a single point of torturing immigrants. It's no wonder we're in the state we are.
I have heard of precisely three people in American politics who are left at all, much less far left. Those are AOC, Bernie Sanders, and Zohran Mamdani. The left is certainly not dominating any primaries.
They are democratic socialists, the far left is a much bigger camp.

The rule of thumb I use is, do they say things like "win at all costs" or talk about how they want to dominate others, forcing their views on all Americans.

Yeah it's a really bad echo chamber, hard to find any system that is not built around group thinking
So you're not against fascism?
Anglo-American media spend the 2000s and 2010s accusing Denmark of being fascist.

The word is absolutely meaningless now.

A shocking number of people aren't against fascism, as long as you don't use the actual word to describe what they support.

And when you correctly use the word to describe what they are supporting, you are inciting violence.

{"dead":true,"deleted":true,"id":50238235,"parent":50237990,"time":1792980362,"type":"comment"}
O'Sullivan's First Law: "Any organization not explicitly right-wing will eventually become left-wing"
Usually laws are based on some kind of observable reality.
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.

loading story #50237721
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.
loading story #50237887
We saw how they took it last time.
Not really. If you follow anyone who has been covering latam for a long time they had odds of this election at a coinflip.
loading story #50238119
loading story #50239142
An opaque, illegal system. Brazilian law states votes must be counted publicly.
loading story #50238632
[flagged]
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...

loading story #50237789
loading story #50237667
loading story #50237679
loading story #50237834
loading story #50237710
loading story #50237738
loading story #50238179
Why unfortunate?
loading story #50237686
loading story #50237663
The amount of mental gymnastics people will do to support fascist dictator wannabes is truly insane. For your sake I hope you find reality.
loading story #50237716
loading story #50237775
loading story #50238051
loading story #50237793