A abstenção e o poder do voto de quem não votou
A podcast episode analyzing abstention in Brazil's 2024 presidential election, where over 33 million voters (21% abstention rate) didn't vote in the first round. Political scientist Jairo Nicolau discusses the profile of absent voters, explaining that abstention stems from multiple causes—low education, age over 70, bureaucratic barriers, and political disengagement—rather than a single factor, and he argues the 2024 election mirrors 2022's deeply divided electorate.
Summary
The podcast "A abstenção e o poder do voto de quem não votou" features journalist Natuza Neri interviewing political scientist Jairo Nicolau about abstention in Brazil's 2024 elections. The episode opens with personal testimonies from non-voters expressing dissatisfaction with both candidates and disillusionment with politics. The first turno recorded 33.3 million abstentions (21.1% abstention rate), the highest since 1998, with higher abstention rates in southeastern states like São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, and Minas Gerais. A Datafolha survey reveals that abstention reasons vary widely: 19% were traveling, 18% were sick, 13% lacked interest in the election, 9% were working, 7% lacked documents, and 6% found the voting location too far away. Nicolau explains that the abstention profile has remained consistent across the last three elections: voters with lower education abstain more frequently, women vote more than men, young people (18-29) have the highest abstention rates among mandatory voters, and people over 70 have dramatically higher abstention (reaching 50% for ages 70-75) because voting becomes optional at that age. He notes that approximately one-third of the 33 million abstainers are people with the legal right not to vote (over 70 and illiterate voters), another significant group comprises people living outside their registered voting municipality, and an unmeasured portion represents deliberate political abstention. Nicolau points out that the actual abstention is higher than reported because 5 million people were removed from the electoral registry in the past year alone for missing three consecutive elections. When comparing the two candidates' vulnerability to abstention, Nicolau argues neither candidate has a clear advantage: Lula loses among low-education voters (who abstain more), but gains among women (who vote more), while Bolsonaro's son Flávio gains among men but loses among women. Nicolau identifies demographic challenges for each: Lula must mobilize young women and elderly women (both traditionally his voters but with high abstention), while Flávio must mobilize young men and elderly men. Regarding the broader electoral landscape, Nicolau describes 2024 as essentially a "third round" of 2022, with nearly identical social divisions: women supporting Lula, men supporting Flávio, higher-education voters supporting Flávio, and lower-education voters supporting Lula. Geographically, Flávio won 14 states and the Federal District compared to Lula's performance in the Northeast (33-point advantage) and smaller cities, though Flávio made gains in traditionally Lula-strong rural areas. The episode concludes by discussing an unexpected phenomenon: spontaneous, youth-led street mobilizations for Lula in the second round, which Nicolau compares to the 2013 protest movements—a decentralized, rapidly-organized movement using social media rather than traditional party-organized campaign events. This contrasts sharply with the silent, apathetic first-round campaign.
About this episode
Convidado: Jairo Nicolau, cientista político, pesquisador do Centro de Pesquisa e Documentação de História Contemporânea do Brasil da FGV-RJ e autor de 'O País Dividido: Duas Décadas de Eleições Presidenciais no Brasil' e 'O Brasil Dobrou à Direita: uma Radiografia da Eleição de Bolsonaro'. Eleição após eleição, cresce o índice de eleitores que não comparecem às urnas. Neste ano, foi registrado o recorde de abstenção para uma eleição presidencial: cerca de 33,5 milhões de eleitores, o equivalente a um a cada cinco brasileiros aptos. Agora, os dois candidatos que chegam ao 2º turno disputam este enorme contingente de votos. Neste episódio, Natuza Nery recebe o cientista político Jairo Nicolau para explicar quais são os diversos perfis deste eleitor que não compareceu às urnas e apontar quais os motivos pelos quais estes mesmos eleitores podem se convencer a votar em Flávio Bolsonaro (PL) ou Lula (PT) no 2º turno. Jairo também analisa os dados desta eleição – que classifica como um “3º turno” de 2022 – e indica que fatos novos poderiam mobilizar o eleitorado.
Key Insights
- Nicolau argues that approximately one-third of the 33 million abstainers are legally exempt from voting (people over 70 and illiterate voters), meaning the commonly cited abstention figures misrepresent how many electors deliberately chose not to vote.
- The political scientist claims that the 2024 election replicates the 2022 social divisions almost identically—women supporting Lula, men supporting Flávio, higher-education voters supporting Flávio, and lower-education voters supporting Lula—suggesting no significant political realignment occurred despite Bolsonaro's absence from the ballot.
- Nicolau observes that youth comprise the group with the highest abstention rates among mandatory voters (18-29 years old with over 4 million absent voters), and he notes this group is split: young women lean toward Lula while young men lean toward Flávio, requiring targeted mobilization strategies for each candidate.
- The analyst states that abstention paradoxically helped Flávio Bolsonaro in the first round because it was concentrated in states like Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo where Flávio had stronger support, while higher turnout in the Northeast would have benefited Lula.
- Nicolau identifies an emerging political phenomenon of decentralized, youth-led street mobilizations using social media convocations in the second round, which he compares to 2013 protest movements and contrasts with the silent, party-controlled campaigns of previous elections.
Topics
Transcript
Num oferecimento de Eleven Labs. Agentes de inteligência artificial, atendendo seu cliente 24 horas. Acesse elevenlabs.io Eu não votei no primeiro turno e nem vou votar no segundo. Porque eu não concordo com os dois candidatos a presidentes atuais. Muitos eleitores não se identificam com nenhum dos candidatos eu não votei no primeiro turno das eleições eu fui uma das irresponsáveis que primeiro esqueceu de trocar o título de eleitor quando se mudou e isso é um ponto outros se perdem na burocracia eleitoral tem muitas pessoas que se mudam, mudam de cidade, mudam de estado e não trocam a cidade de votação e há aqueles que até desacreditam da política no geral pra que eu vou me envolver com…
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from O Assunto
O movimento contra o voto feminino – no Brasil e no mundo
A podcast examining the contemporary anti-women's suffrage movement gaining traction on social media and in politics globally, particularly in the US and Brazil, often promoted by women influencers and conservative politicians who frame women's voting rights as harmful to traditional family structures and society.
Antipetismo vs. antibolsonarismo: o voto 'do contra' que pode decidir a eleição
Political scientist Carlos Melo discusses how antipetismo (anti-PT sentiment) and antibolsonarismo (anti-Bolsonaro sentiment) have become Brazil's dominant political forces, explaining the 2024 election results where both leading candidates face similar rejection rates (~43%) but differ in their underlying voter bases and geographic penetration.
A eleição das redes sociais e o que muda na disputa como a conhecemos
This podcast episode analyzes how social media has transformed Brazilian electoral politics, particularly in the 2024 congressional elections. It examines the strategic advantages of digital natives, algorithmic logic favoring disruptive content, and the organizational differences between right and left campaigns that shaped parliamentary outcomes.
A reação do mercado ao 1º turno: da euforia à incerteza
Following Brazil's first electoral round, financial markets reacted positively to Flávio Bolsonaro's leading position, with the stock market hitting 200,000 points and the dollar falling 4%, but economist Bruno Carasa warns that market expectations rest on vague proposals and risk being disappointed if the government prioritizes ideological agendas over fiscal reform.
Flávio Bolsonaro x Lula no 2º turno: discursos e estratégias
A podcast discussion analyzing the 2026 Brazilian presidential runoff between Flávio Bolsonaro and Lula, examining voter behavior through on-the-ground reporting, campaign strategies, and the political fallout from an unexpectedly strong first-round performance by Bolsonaro's candidate. The episode explores institutional crises, market reactions, and the challenge both campaigns face in attracting undecided voters and previous supporters of eliminated candidates.