Why Brazil's Protests Didn't Translate into Change at the Ballot Box
Why Brazil's Protests Didn't Translate into Change at the Ballot Box
Despite major protests in Brazil last year, voters opted for the status quo. Writing for Quartz, AS/COA's Rachel Glickhouse outlines four theories why.
After one of the most complex and fast-changing presidential races in decades, Brazil held an election on Oct. 5 that revealed little of the sentiment for change during last year’s protests. So what happened?
First of all, Marina Silva only won 21% of the vote, a result of a number of factors including successful attack ads by the Workers’ Party and a poorly executed campaign that didn’t convince voters that she would be a viable alternative. Instead, Senator Aécio Neves came within eight points of President Dilma Rousseff. While he would certainly represent a change at the Planalto, he represents the most traditional of Brazilian politics: a wealthy, white, seasoned politician from Minas Gerais. And even though neither Rousseff nor Neves represent a major break from the status quo, they both referred to themselves as the candidate for change in their victory speeches. During her address, Rousseff stood before a massive backdrop that read: “New government, new ideas.” As the two candidates head to a runoff, they’re both jockeying for Silva’s voters and trying to cast themselves as change-makers.
Next, many politicians targeted by the 2013 protests were actually reelected. Despite the fact that corruption was one of the central themes of the protests and a constant complaint of those unhappy with Brazilian politics, notoriously dirty politicians like Paulo Maluf and Fernando Collor got elected. (It’s unclear, however, if Maluf will be able to take office given his ineligibility under the clean record law)....
