Live results here via Brazil’s UOL.

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    This is why I really like the run-off system of the non-instant variety. It gives people a clear choice and a chance to think. People that might not have voted the first round see a stark choice and may think “yeah I better go vote or we’ll have another Bolsanaro running things and I don’t want that.”

    Congrats to Brazil!

    • Hapankaali@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The two-round system is actually very similar in its dynamics to instant runoff voting or FPTP with primaries. All these systems feature a centre squeeze. FPTP without primaries is actually a better system, albeit obviously still vastly inferior to a proportional system, which is what all top-tier democracies (and economies for that matter) use. In the FPTP-without-primary era, the US still had statesmen with broad support as presidents (e.g., FDR, Eisenhower, Theodore Roosevelt), and the election of a Trump would have been unfathomable (at least, on the Republican ticket).

      • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 hours ago

        But why multiple election days when you can have a preferential voting system that has runoff inbuilt?

        Thank goodness for this outcome though.

        • smeenz@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Because it provides for the opportunity to strategically vote based on the results of the previous round.

          • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            7 hours ago

            But it’s still down to two and you have one preference. What’s the strategy?

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      BC was a decision between a center-left candidate (who was doing some stupid election shenanigans) and a center-center candidate (who is by all reports the most boring politician they could find) in a province in Canada.

      This is not any way comparable to a country of over 200M people potentially falling to fascism.

      • rbos@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        The Tories are still going to fuck up treaty negotiations, wreck sex education, push old growth logging, and sell off our health system. They’ll probably also repeal the single-family home zoning ban.

        Going to be a rough FO cycle.

      • Deacon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Do they need to be comparable for me to feel a certain way about their respective outcomes? Both matter to me.

        • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          9 hours ago

          To feel like it’s relevant in a thread about an election in another country, yes, it should be comparable.

          You should probably work on your empathy a little more if over 200 million people facing fascism gives you the same feelings as a province electing a boring centrist.