Live vote counting for Brazilian presidential election | Hacker News Reader

Live vote counting for Brazilian presidential election

poder360.com.br

71 pointsfrozenlettuce104 comments

This site seems to be slightly rounding the results. Official source is at https://resultados.tse.jus.br/oficial/app/index.html#/m/elei...

Lula seems to be winning. Phew.

Anyone know if it's just first past the post for this round? Or is there a threshold?

Whoever is on top wins

Thanks, Yogi Berra.

only marginally

Not a lawyer, but my understanding is, whoever gets more votes wins, regardless of the size of the diffference.

Sounds like a reasonable system. Maybe USA should adopt.

I have a suspicion it's going to be a very narrow result, which is contested, with a significant amount of street violence.

It's a run-off between just those two. So whoever with more votes.

Why does it always have to be this close sigh

Still a 2 million vote gap

Brazil has electronic voting since 1996 and since 2000 all elections in whole country are electronic. Therefore results come out very quickly.

Also, voting is mandatory in Brazil for literate voters between 18 and 70. There are consequences if you don't vote, ranging from difficulty renewing your passport to losing your job if you work for the government. If you can justify your absence you can do so conveniently with the e-Titulo app however.

Is voting "no contest" an option in a run-off like this?

Yes, there's a "Blank" option when voting, and there's also a "null" vote, which happens if you vote for a number that's not in the running (each candidate has a number. For example, in this running Lula is 13 and Bolsonaro is 22). Only valid votes are counted, so whoever gets anything over 50% of the valid votes win.

I'm seeing 3 million Nulo votes, which is way more than the margin of victory. Interesting.

It's always an option, I believe. You must vote, but you're not forced to vote for any candidate.

It's important to say that if you fail to vote, the fine is R$3.50 or around US$0.66.

A brazilian friend always say that many families in Brazil are split because of the elections. That's just crazy. The power of fake news and social media are destroying our civilization.

Can we get some no-internet or at least low-internet communities, please? Amish 2.0. I don’t even want to bring up children in this post-internet world.

Yep. Many people that used to love each other split for such nonsense shit

Politics and religion (and many other things) have been breaking up families since the dawn of politics and religion.

The internet is not to blame here.

I wrote almost the same few minutes ago, but my comment got flagged.

Latin American countries being violently split left/right pre-dates the internet by a long way, sadly.

What about the USA? Is the polarization now worse than in the ’90s?

At least in Brazil, not nearly to the point it's been in the last 6-8 years though. It's actually violent now.

It isn't the internet.

Similar communities have people who use the internet, some of the Amish do (Hasidim would be another). But they do so recognising that it is dangerous. Not coincidentally, many people in these communities don't have TVs either.

Accepting the idea that you should only be concerned with things that directly concern you is, unfortunately, something that is very hard to learn. The reason it is easier for people in these communities is that they are already isolated. It isn't the internet, it is people (the Amish also have internet support groups...that would be very effective, but the internet has also atomized us).

Just personally, I am with you 100% though. I am not even someone who uses my phone very much, I grew up after the real brain-rot of the internet...but it has filled a gap in my life so it is very hard to shift (again, not the internet's fault...it is mine), and work out where the line should be. I also studied politics/economic history, try as I might I can't stop myself being interested with things that really aren't any of my business...it is a real problem (Reddit is the worst for me, I have moved off all the worst subreddits but I still have a bad habit...what makes it so hard is that it is useful too, if I need a question answered it is my first call).

Whoever works out a way to really solve internet addiction will be a very rich man/woman. It will be one of the biggest issues in the life of any kid who was born after 2000 onwards. I was born much earlier, have avoided the brainrot and it is still a massive issue in my life.

This is the apuration for the second round on the Brazilian presidential election. It should finish in the next few hours (the 1st round took about 5 hours to complete)

The expected progress is: urban areas should be counted first, with Bolsonaro leading. As the remaining votes arrive they should start turn the percentage on Lula's favor. On most pools both candidates are tied, so the outcome is uncertain.

One can only hope they finally rid themselves of Bolsonaro

Where is the down vote button

Not available for new accounts, thankfully.

Good reply, I appreciate the banter ;)

I doubt it will happen. From what I'm reading and messages from relatives, federal police is blocking access to the voting polls in some poor areas where Lula is popular.

I don't think the PRF has enough people to actually make a difference in that blockade. Having said that, these are truly dark times for our democracy.

Futures markets favor Lula 10:1. Do you have reason to doubt the herd?

Futures markets tend to be quite awful at predicting military dictatorships, and are even quite keen on right wing fascism. Take everything with a grain of sand. Not just tonight, where the results will be announced, and Bolsonaro will protest them if he doesn't win, but even in the upcoming years.

As someone almost completely ignorant about Brazilian politics, this surprised me a bit. In the U.S., it urban voters tend to vote for the more progressive candidates. I'd assumed that was more or less a universal truth. Apparently not!

The split is not really about urban voters. It is between the more developed south and the up and coming north of the country. Lula has enacted policies that help in the development of traditional poorer areas in the north of Brazil. That's why the more developed urban centers in the south don't like him.

Isn’t it curious how urban is right leaning and rural is left. There are obvious reasons but still interesting.

It’s interesting, possibly for the reason you’re picking up on: that’s broadly the opposite in Canada and the U.S.

the UK too

What would those reasons be?

Rural areas are poorer, so they vote for the one who has a record of ending hunger would make sense. Why do urban areas lean to Bolsonaro?

I don't know a lot about Brazil, so someone may correct me, but I'm under the impression that crime in Brazilian cities can be quite bad.

This is a big reason. Another is a feeling, common in better developed regions, that their tax money is being used to sustain regions that "don't pull their weight"

Source: lived in Brazil for 5 years

It’s not that clear-cut, in the richest states in the South the pattern is similar to what you see in the US, urban left, rural right.

Also, this election is not typical. Left or centre-left has won 6 ou of the 7 past presidential elections since the end of military rule. Brazil, like most Latin American countries, is predominantly left-leaning. Bolsonaro has been an anomaly and most likely will not be reelected.

I don't think any is obvious.

But there are different views about urban violence (what is a huge talking point of Bolsonaro), different ways people get their news, urban community breakdown, different religious trends, and a lot more.

It's only curious if all you need to define political ambitions is two directions: left and right. It's 2022, your device supports more than black and white, and so should the thinking.

Ah, just like the US - the progressive areas report last, so they have an opportunity to "fix" the vote. This is what a lot of conservatives in the US believe anyway. I don't think the 2020 election was stolen, but I think it's worth assuaging these concerns by changing procedures so that all in-person and mail-in votes received on Election Day report at exactly the same time.

Just for context, based on previous elections you should expect 110-120MM+ total votes once it is complete.

Lula just passed Bolsonaro a few minutes ago.

Is apuration an English word? Doesn't seem to turn up anywhere. Some results in French but the definition is not clear.

Yeah had to look it up... something like 'observe' or 'monitor'...?

The correct translation is ballot counting.

Lula technically won at this time, the news is just out.

Some futures of Bolsonaro winning[1], if you want to take a look at what that (tiny) market thinks (basically 98% convinced of him losing right now).

[1] https://ftx.com/trade/BOLSONARO2022

How does a FTX token like this work? How is it funded? I noticed most purchases started at around $0.30, so if he had indeed won, how would this token have yielded $1 (as the page says)?

I was also curious so I went to the "learn more" link[0], but it doesn't really answer the questions and seems rather confused.

It describes the token as "a futures contract that expires to $1 if Jair Bolsonaro wins the 2022 Brazilian presidential election and $0 otherwise". Leaving aside the fact that it's not really a futures contract (since it's not an obligation to buy or sell any underlying asset), the implication seems to be that it is a financial obligation issued by some entity, presumably FTX itself though it's not clear.

There is also this gem:

> FTX retains the final right to interpretation of this contract. FTX will not entertain any objections to this contract’s settlement mechanisms. Attempting to object will result in immediate account closure. FTX may modify the terms at any point. By trading these contracts, you are agreeing to abide by FTX’s interpretations of them.

[0] https://help.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/360060916172

Seeing many reacting to large number of blank/spoiled votes. For a speculative scenario where the proportion of blank/spoiled votes gains an absolute majority, read Saramago's Essay on lucidity

Is it common for there to be this many spoiled votes (over 4m at this point)?

Yes, it is. Bear in mind that voting is mandatory in Brazil (for anyone over 18 up to 65 I thinkg. 16 and older can vote but is not mandatory). Also, most people don't know, even brazilians, but if you don't vote and don't have a valid justification for not voting, the fine you pay is very, very, cheap. Like less than 1 USD.

That's not cheap for the millions earning less than $200 a month.

I just checked, it's USD 0.66 (sixty-six cents), or 3.5 Brazilian Reais. That's a cheap fine even by brazilian poverty levels. The most annoying thing about not voting is not the cheap fine, it's the things you can't do if you don't get it sorted out (either by paying the fine or by presenting a valid reason for not voting): you can't work in the public sector, you can't get a passport, etc.

No fine is cheap when you already can't buy enough food.

C'mon, you're just pushing your agenda now. "No fine is cheap" is BS. How about a 2 cent fine? Not cheap? Whatever.

I'm not pushing an agenda. This is basic math.

Tell me then (really, no sarcasm), what would you consider to be a 'cheap' fine in Brazil?

USD $0.66 is cheap for Brazil. What I said is more specific: I said that it's not cheap for Brazilians who run out of money for food before their next pay. Both can be true if you're not looking for a debate.

I am amazed to find people cheering for Lula.

Not that Bolsonaro is a good choice, but you really should read up on Lula. The US media reduces this as Left vs Right, but it's more like horribly corrupt, racist, opportunist with a thin veneer of Left, vs horribly corrupt and military-backed Right.

Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luiz_Inácio_Lula_da_Silva#Corr...

And to be clear, my point is that Brazilians find themselves in an election that is oddly similar to the US election: a choice between two awful candidates that should both be retired from politics.

This is the situation that is playing out in many democraties. Is it because the people are more informed that we consider everyone is bad and just choosing the lesser evil out of two?

> Is it because the people are more informed that we consider everyone is bad

I think it has more to do with disinformation and tribalism being more common now.

your political party is like your sports team now, you support it no matter what and the rest are the enemy.

I understand that the link has the word "corruption" in it, but it's worth actually reading. Election authorities in Brazil banned Bolsonaro from referring to Lula as "corrupt" or a "thief," and fined him. Normally we don't refer to people who had their convictions annulled (and recorded conspiracies by administrations against them widely shared) as corrupt.

> On 23 March 2021, the Supreme Federal Court ruled by a 3–2 decision that Moro, who had overseen Lula's trial in a case, was biased against him.[23] It upheld the ruling on 23 June by a 7–4 decision.[105] Judge Gilmar Mendes of the Supreme Federal Court on 24 June annulled the two other cases Moro had brought against Lula, reasoning that there was a link between them and the case in which Moro was declared biased. This meant that all evidence Moro had collected against Lula is inadmissible in court and fresh trials would be needed.

> On 9 June 2019, The Intercept published leaked Telegram messages between the judge in Lula's case, Sérgio Moro, and the Operation Car Wash lead prosecutor, Deltan Dallagnol, in which they allegedly conspired to convict Lula to prevent his candidacy for the 2018 presidential election.[113][114] [115][116][117][118][119] Moro was accused of lacking impartiality in Lula's trial.[120] Following the disclosures, the resumption of legal proceedings was determined by the Supreme Court.[121] Moro denied any wrongdoing or judicial misconduct during the course of Operation Car Wash and his investigation of the former president, claiming that the conversations leaked by The Intercept were misrepresented by the press and that conversations between prosecutors and judges are normal.[122] Moro became Minister of Justice and Public Security after the election of president Jair Bolsonaro, and it is disputed whether an agreement was in place prior to Bolsonaro's election.

> The information published by The Intercept prompted reactions both in Brazil and overseas. A group of seventeen lawyers, ministers of Justice, and high court members from eight countries reacted to the leaks by describing former President Lula as a political prisoner and calling for his release.[123] United States Senator Bernie Sanders said Lula should be released and his conviction annulled. Ro Khanna asked the Trump administration to investigate Lula's case, saying that "Moro was a bad actor and part of a larger conspiracy to send Lula to jail".[124] American political commentator Michael Brooks, a vocal advocate for the former president, stated that Lula's imprisonment and Moro's alleged political motives had rendered the results of the 2018 election "fundamentally illegitimate."[125]

> Judge Edson Fachin of the Supreme Federal Court annulled all convictions against Lula on 8 March 2021, ruling that the court in Curitiba which convicted him lacked jurisdiction to do so, and ordered a retrial in Brasilia.[130] A full Supreme Court bench later upheld the ruling by an 8–3 decision on 15 April.

The judge that convicted Lula was found to be biased against Lula and the charges against Lula were thrown out.

"On 9 June 2019, The Intercept published leaked Telegram messages between the judge in Lula's case, Sérgio Moro, and the Operation Car Wash lead prosecutor, Deltan Dallagnol, in which they allegedly conspired to convict Lula to prevent his candidacy for the 2018 presidential election"

That judge then went on to be appointed by Bolsonaro.

Perhaps the locals cheering on Lula aren't as convinced as you are about him being corrupt.

He is also popular because his Bolso Familia program wiped out huge amounts of hunger. Poverty in Brazil dropped by a dramatic 27% during Lula's first term. So of course he has supporters.

Lula was a popular president in his first term, and his zero hunger programme was effective, but his annulled conviction for corruption was essentially him getting off on a technicality. All the evidence against him and his cronies is real, albeit now inadmissible.

None of which is to say that Bolsonaro is the hero of this story. It’s a proper Kodos and Kang situation.

If you call technicality the finding (confirmed by justice) of thousands of messages between the judge of the case and the prosecution plotting how to convict him despite nonexistent evidence, then yes.

The disgraced judge then immediately turned to use his new fame to enter politics. A complete sham.

I want Lula to win, but only because I want Bolsonaro out. To call Lula Innocent like the left does here is absurd. You had huge corporations returning billions of stolen Reais to the government, some even took out whole page ads in the big newspapers to apologize and admit their guilt, and yet the left still maintains that the whole operation to go after them (these corporations were in bed with Lula's party) a farse. Completely ridiculous. The left here acts just as dishonestly as the right.

The left does not maintain that. Many people were charged and convicted. You can find a rare person claiming these things, but the vast majority of the left believes the corruption happened. Lula's involvement however is debated.

What are you talking about? I live here, I know dozens of people who say openly that Lula is innocent and that the whole Lava Jato operation was a farce. This is pretty common thought in the more radical left here.

I live here too. I already said that Lula is the exception.

Yes, the more radical left does say that. At least now you're being more specific and more accurate. Your original claim was far more sweeping. And wrong.

Supporters of the PT party number in the tens of millions. What percentage of them would you say have the opinion that the Lava-Jato operation was a farce? 9 out of 10 PT supporters make this claim, that it was a farce. The majority of 'the left' claims this. The people you're referring to is not 'the left'. You said that it's a rare person who says this, which is very, very wrong.

> What percentage of them would you say have the opinion that the Lava-Jato operation was a farce?

That depends on what details you ask for. If you ask if them if Moro was biased and corrupt, they can simply point to the court ruling that he was.

If you ask them if the politicians who went to jail were all innocent, you'll get far far fewer people supporting that idea.

The details are important.

> 9 out of 10 PT supporters make this claim,

Please share your source for this information.

> The people you're referring to is not 'the left'.

They are. When my friends tell me they are politically left, it's not up to you to decide they aren't the "real" left, whatever that might be.

> it's not up to you to decide they aren't the "real" left

Sorry, but sometimes it is. When Bolsonaro's crowd started caliming that the Nazi Party was a leftist party because it had "Socialit" in its name, I can comfortably decide that no, the National Socialist Party was not socialist. When my friends tell me that they are against socialized medical care and that people should also pay for their children's education, yet he says that he's a "leftist", I can comfortably decide that no, he's not.

You don't know my friends. I do. When my friends say they are left and believe in socialized medicine and other leftist policy, I can comfortably decide they are left. Also note: no true Scotsman logical fallacy.

Did you come up with a source for your claim that 9 out of 10 PT members will say Lava Jato was a complete farse and that no one was guilty of corruption?

You're right, the majority of Petistas approve of the Lava-Jato operation. Only the rare one will condemn it as a farce. Again, whatever...

It's safe to say you don't have a source and just made your numbers up.

And you just asked me in another thread for an answer without sarcasm and yet here you are being sarcastic. One rule for us, another rule for you. Whatever indeed.

What do you mean he was popular in his first term? He left office in his second term with an 87% approval rating.

Ignoring the corruption claims that people have already addressed, what's the basis for "racist" on your claims for the left leaning candidate?

idk, I don’t doubt that Lula is corrupt and flawed, but Bolsinaro is one of the most authoritarian right-wing leaders I know. While Id rather have a reasonable right-wing leader than a racist corrupt one on either side, I’d rather have a racist corrupt left-wing leader than an even more racist, corrupt right-wing

Are you reading US media? The US was clearly backing the coup, and Bolsonaro.

So you're probably living in a propaganda bubble.

Bolsonaro cast a vote in the coup impeachment dedicating his vote to the guy who under the dictatorship tortured his (Bolsanaro's) political opponent.

They are not the same.

This thread right here is a good reproduction of what is happening to Brazil.

Given the reports that have been coming from Brazil, this will almost certainly be a "win" for Bolsonaro.

Not what the betting markets are showing. Gone up from 70% chance for lula to win to 93% in last couple of hours.

Is there a market on Bolsonaro not conceding?

It just ticked over to Lula after I posted - and I'm super happy to see that he now has a 1% margin with 90% of the regions in.

Hopefully we'll have the win confirmed within the hour :)

He's just lost the lead, though.

Thank goodness!

Twitter has been a horror story of voter suppression and that made me very sceptical.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com