Should have seen him at the debate. He was running circles around Bolsonaro, at thirty years his junior.

Being a fascist is bad enough, being an incompetent fascist is more than bad enough.

Now being an incompetent fascist that get's humiliated against someone as old as trump is downright sad.

I agree but still better than a Trump aligned person winning. Anyone in that pool is like voting for the end times. Basically authoritarian types, anything must be better than them, even an old dude.Ill add that I know almost nothing except who Trump wanted to win and they're bitching about results, the Trump way, oh also think the loser vamoosed recently, to the well known sanctuary of the United States. Oh good job we know how much they enjoy immigrants.....he has money? Oh pardon my faux pas.

sounds like another 81 yo that was a sore loser in 2020.

Unfortunately the majority of deputies and senators are from Bolsonaro's party. Lula's win was a huge victory, but we still have a lot to fight for here in Brazil.

The good thing is that Lula's party learned how to comunicate through social media, this helped him TREMENDOUSLY in his victory.

4.4 million votes. No recount is going to fix that.

When you're against democracy, it would be weird to respect the democratic process. Fascists will always try to circumvent the rules as long as they're not in their favour, simply because fascists don't respect anyone but themselves.

this was literally the narrative to try and make them less secure by the bolsonaros when they were in power. the brazilian voting machine is actually state of the art and they know it.

There was a saying in Brazil, up to the 90s, that "elections are won in the counting" - fraud was rampant, especially at municipal/state level and the electronic urns got rid of that.

Paper can only be considered more secure if you have special paper and special printing like money bills, otherwise they can be falsified much more easily.

Lost me on that. Pen and paper aren't at all more secure than Brazilian voting machines.

They are essentially low spec linux computers without ports, internet acess or easy way in. The only thing they do it store results and print them on paper.

Even if one manages to crack open a machine and sneak something inside, there is security to prevent it to pass as genuine

the machines can also be rigged, and often for the fascists.

Electronic voting is such a liability for exactly this reason

Gotta go back to the old tried and true Butterfly Ballot system. That never fails.

Pen/pencil and paper. Much more secure.

Nothing in the election machinery prevents a candidate from claiming fraud.

Certainly, nothing about pen and paper ballots prevents disreputable agents from stuffing ballot boxes or just refusing to count opposition votes entirely.

Right wing philosophy boils down to "obey me or else".

The origin of the words left and right in a political context comes from the French Revolution. Specifically from the events of the Estates General, and the writing of the failed constitution of 1789.

The first vote, "Should the Monarch have an absolute veto over laws passed?" was determined by seating. Those in favor (the nobility and clergy from the richer areas) sat to the right of the speaker's podium, those opposed (people who wanted democracy, which included the some of the country nobles, country clergy, and the near entirety of the third estate) sat to the left.

This pattern repeated on most questions, those who supported monarchy sat to the right, democracy to the left. The newspapers, which were recently completely freed of censorship, started using left and right as shorthand for the two sides.

The philosophers then stepped in. Tomas Paine and Edmund Burke for two English language examples. Paine actually traveled to France and served in the legislature, despite not speaking French. Edmund Burke stayed in England and wrote about how the masses needed to be controlled by their betters, who should be selected not by birth, but by wealth. Burke was not a noble, but he was rich.

Edmund Burke is the father of Conservatism. He was somewhat explicit that the thing he wanted to conserve, was power over others. Later writers have obfuscated things a bit, but if you look, the message is the same.

So, when a right-winger loses, it's someone who really wants unchecked control over others being told to fuck off.