Eduardismo, Lulismo “Exit” and Election Commotion

Transcrição

PMKT – Revista Brasileira de Pesquisas de Marketing, Opinião e Mídia
ISSN: 1983-9456 (Impressa)
ISSN: 2317-0123 (On-line)
Editor: Fauze Najib Mattar
Sistema de avaliação: Triple Blind Review
Idiomas: Português e Inglês
Publicação: ABEP – Associação Brasileira de Empresas de Pesquisa
Eduardismo, Lulismo “Exit” and Election Commotion - Which Motivated Paulo Câmara
Electoral Success for the Government of Pernambuco?
Eduardismo, “Saída” do Lulismo e Comoção Eleitoral – O que Motivou o Sucesso Eleitoral
de Paulo Câmara para o Governo de Pernambuco?
Submission: Apr./29/2015 - Approval: Oct./16/2015
Adriano Oliveira
Undergraduate in Social Sciences at the Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE). Master and PhD
in Political Science at UFPE. Political Science Adjunct Professor at UFPE. Coordinator in the
Strategic Studies of Electoral Behavior Centre. Member of Comunicación Política y Comportamiento
Electoral (Laticom).
E-mail: [email protected]
Professional address: Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Departamento de Ciência Política,
Pernambuco - Brasil.
Gabriella Fidelis
Undergraduate in Political Science at the Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE). Research
Analyst in Cenário Inteligência.
Mariana Barros
Political Science Undergraduate Student at the Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE). UFPE
Scientific Initiation Scholarship at UFPE. IPMN Research Analysis Intern.
Eduardismo, Lulismo “Exit” and Election Commotion - Which Motivated Paulo Câmara Electoral Success for the Government of Pernambuco?
Adriano Oliveira/ Gabriella Fidelis/ Mariana Barros
ABSTRACT
What motivated the Paulo Câmara electoral success for the Pernambuco 1 government election? The
government election of Pernambuco in 2014 was unprecedented due to the former governor of
Pernambuco and at the time presidential candidate Eduardo Campos death, which occurred during
the election process. Eduardismo and Lulismo, votes’ neodeterminantes, they were present in the
recent elections in Pernambuco. These phenomena represent the capacity to Eduardo Campos and
Luis Inácio Lula da Silva to influence the voters’ choice. Eduardo Campos’ death made possible the
election commotion, which reinforced Eduardismo strength and allowed Lulismo weakening among
voters - mechanisms. Based on qualitative and quantitative research in Pernambuco, this paper
answers to the problem proposed proving the suggested mechanisms. Due to the 2014 election
originality, this article is characterized as a case study.
KEYWORDS:
Vote Neodeterminants, Eduardismo, Lulismo, electoral commotion, influence.
RESUMO
O que motivou o sucesso eleitoral de Paulo Câmara na eleição para o governo de Pernambuco? A
eleição de 2014 para o governo de Pernambuco caracterizou-se pelo ineditismo em razão da morte
do governador de Pernambuco e então presidenciável Eduardo Campos durante o processo eleitoral.
Eduardismo e Lulismo, neodeterminantes do voto, estavam presentes nas recentes eleições em
Pernambuco. Tais fenômenos representam a capacidade de Eduardo Campos e Luís Inácio Lula da
Silva de influenciarem a escolha dos eleitores. A morte de Eduardo Campos possibilitou a comoção
eleitoral, a qual reforçou a força do Eduardismo e possibilitou o enfraquecimento do Lulismo entre
eleitores – mecanismos. Por meio de pesquisas qualitativas e quantitativas realizadas em Pernambuco,
este artigo responde ao problema proposto, comprovando os mecanismos sugeridos. Diante do
ineditismo da eleição de 2014, este artigo caracteriza-se por ser um estudo de caso.
PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
Neodeterminantes do voto, Eduardismo, Lulismo, comoção eleitoral, influência.
1
Pernambuco is a Brazilian state situated in the northeast of the country. (TN)
PMKT – Revista Brasileira de Pesquisas de Marketing, Opinião e Mídia (ISSN 1983-9456 Impressa e ISSN 2317-0123 On-line), São Paulo, Brasil, V.
17, p. 43-62, outubro, 2015 - www.revistapmkt.com.br
44
1
INTRODUCTION2
The last election to government of Pernambuco was atypical because of the governor and then
presidential candidate Eduardo Campos (PSB) death. In April 2014, he removed himself from
government of Pernambuco and chose to run for the presidential election. Such act was accompanied
by the choice of Paulo Camera (PSB) as a candidate to the government of Pernambuco.
During the electoral trajectory, Eduardo Campos died by an air crash on August 13, 2014. Before his
death, researches revealed that Paulo Câmara main opponent, Senator Armando Monteiro (PTB3),
had wide advantage over the PSB4 candidate. However, after the PSB presidential candidate death,
the Pernambuco electoral framework has changed. Paulo Câmara won voters quickly and
continuously, and he won the election by a wide margin over his main opponent.5
In 2012, in the election for mayor of Recife, the then governor Eduardo Campos supported Geraldo
Julio (PSB), which won the election against PT. The Geraldo's victory showed Eduardo Campos force
in influencing the choice of voters. Such power of influence was described as "Eduardismo”
(OLIVEIRA; GADELHA; COSTA, 2014).
In the state elections of 2006 and 2010, President Lula (PT) supported Eduardo Campos (PSB). In
both elections, Eduardo won impressive victories over their opponents6. In the 2006 presidential
election, Lula obtained 78.48% of the votes in the first round in Pernambuco. In the presidential race
of 2010, Dilma Rousseff (PT) won in Pernambuco, in the first round, 61% of the votes.
Because of Lula’s electoral performance in Brazil and its allies in Pernambuco, the term "Lulismo”
emerged. According to Oliveira (2011), the term comes from the admiration, confidence and approval
of management indicators. Lulismo has the ability to encourage voters' choices for a given competitor
(OLIVEIRA, 2011) and is not observed only among Pernambuco voters but also among Brazilian
suffragettes (OLIVEIRA, 2011; SINGER, 2009).
The facts reported encourage the paper main problem formulation: what motivated the Paulo
Câmara’s electoral success in the government of Pernambuco election? Because of this problem, the
following events occur: 1) Eduardismo conditioned the Paulo Câmara electoral success. 2) The
"electoral commotion" that emerged after the unexpected and tragic death of Eduardo Campos
possible electoral success of Paulo Câmara. 3) The absence of confrontation between Lulismo and
Eduardismo allowed the victory of Paulo Câmara7.
Eduardismo (ED), electoral commotion (EC) and Lulismo (LU) are independent variables that allow
finding this paper main problem – Paulo Câmara electoral success (PC, dependent variable).
However, the variables ED and EC can be competing or complementary. If they are competitors, the
Translator’s Note will be described as TN
Brazilian Labor Party. In Portuguese, Partido Trabalhista Brasileiro (TN)
4
Brazilian Socialist Party. In Portuguese, Partido Socialista Brasileiro (TN)
5
Paul Camera (PSB) won the election in the first round with 68.08% of the votes. His main opponent, Armando
Monteiro (PTB), had 31.07% of the votes.
6
In 2006, Eduardo Campos got in the second round 65.36% of the votes, competing against Mendonça Filho, and in
2010, 82.84% in the first round against Jarbas Vasconcelos.
7
Assume the expressions Eduardismo o and Lulismo as neodeterminantes the vote (OLIVEIRA, 2001; OLIVEIRA;
GADELHA; COSTA, 2014).
2
3
45
predominance of one over voters weakens the other, and if they are complementary, both contribute
to explain Paulo Câmara electoral success (PC).
Moreover, there are other possibilities. The variable ED conditioned the EC origin. So if ED did not
exist, EC does not arise. Therefore, it is possible that, as I said, ED and EC are complementary or
competing. However, it is also possible that regardless of ED, EC arose.
Oliveira (2011) shows that the Lulismo (LU) was present in Pernambuco and may have contributed
to the Eduardo Campos electoral success in the government of Pernambuco electoral battle. Eduardo
Campos and Lula ran the 2006 and 2010 elections as allies.
In the 2014 election, Lula's former president supported Armando Monteiro for governor of
Pernambuco office, and Eduardo Campos supported Paulo Câmara. Eduardo Campos was against
presidential candidate Dilma Rousseff, supported by Lula. Therefore, it was feasible to consider that
at some point in the electoral trajectory Eduardismo and Lulismo enter into confrontation in the 2014
election in Pernambuco.
The reasoning presented suggest the following mechanisms in the electoral dynamic in the 2014
election:
1. Mechanism 1: ED (independent variable) enabled the PC victory - (dependent variable);
2. Mechanism 2: EC allowed PC to victory;
3. Mechanism 3: ED and EC (independent variables) enabled PC electoral success;
4. Mechanism 4: ED conditioned the EC origin. Both allowed PC to victory;
5. Mechanism 5: EC arose, regardless of ED, and influenced the PC electoral success;
6. Mechanism 6: Eduardo Campos’ death prevented the confrontation between Eduardismo and
Lulismo. Thus, Eduardismo (ED) reigned in the electoral environment and enabled the Paulo Câmara
(PC) electoral success.
In this article, we use the explanation for mechanisms to explain the Paulo Câmara electoral success.
The explanation for mechanisms is to reveal the pieces that create or structure a given phenomenon.8
In this type of explanation is possible to identify the causes of the phenomenon.9 The explanation of
this may involve different mechanisms, which are observed in different moments. In the explanation
for mechanisms, various causes may enable the phenomenon origin and strengthening (ELSTER,
2006; HEDSTROM; YLIKOSKI, 2010).
This article is an election case study for the government of Pernambuco in 2014. Therefore, only a
single case will be addressed in a given period. Is not relevant to compare the 2014 election to the
government of Pernambuco with other elections because of a peculiarity, i.e., in this election, there
was the tragic governor's death who resigned the post to run for the presidency, and supported a
candidate government of that state.
8
Eduardismo, Lulismo and electoral commotion are the parts or causes that are used to address the problem of this
article.
9
Causes and pieces may come to be synonymous when the explanation of the phenomenon. In this article, Eduardismo,
Lulismo “exit” and electoral commotion are parts and causes that contribute to explain the Paulo Câmara electoral
success.
46
The explanation for mechanisms require robust empirical evidence (HEDSTRÖM; YLIKOSKI,
2010). As a result, we opted for the case study, as this enables deep study for the researcher in the
social context. Through it, the causal mechanisms and the sequence of events present in the electoral
trajectory for voters and candidates are identified and explained.10 Consequently, theoretical
explanations and concepts arise (BORGES, 2007; FIGUEIREDO FILHO, 2013; GUSMÃO, 2012;
PERISSINOTTO, 2013; VEYNE, 2008).
Qualitative and quantitative survey data among Pernambuco voters are used in this article to respond
to the proposed problem. Research Institute Maurício de Nassau (IPMN) and Cenário Inteligência
conducted the research.11 There were several surveys conducted in the electoral trajectory in 2014 in
the entire state of Pernambuco.12 These studies reveal the voters’ opinion on various situational
aspects, among them management evaluation, candidates’ level of knowledge, the Eduardo Campos
sudden death electoral impact, suffragettes’ desire for change and feelings of voters.13
Historical institutionalism is the theoretical framework of this article. Thus, we have the following
basic premise: the voters are going through the electoral path, and this path, they receive various
influences, from events occurred and actors for example. The voters' decision-making also receives
these influences (OLIVEIRA, 2014; TAIPA; GOMES, 2008).
This article is divided into three parts. Initially, the voters’ opinion on the actors and events before
Eduardo Campos death are presented and analyzed through qualitative and quantitative research.
Then, we do the same, but in a new context, ie, after Eduardo Campos’ death. The last part of the
paper responds to the proposed problem and presents the hypotheses presented veracity or not.
2
EDUARDISMO AND LULISMO
The term Eduardismo came in 2012. In that year, the governor Eduardo Campos has chosen to launch
Geraldo Julio (PSB) as candidate for mayor of Recife14. Geraldo started the campaign in 4th place,
but in the course of electoral history, he had a fast rise and won the election in the 1st round. Eduardo
Campos actively participated in his chosen campaign (OLIVEIRA; GADELHA; COSTA, 2014).
The electoral success of Geraldo Julio enabled the origin of Eduardismo term. Thus, the term means
the ability of the governor Eduardo fields to influence the choice of constituents. The Eduardismo
consists from qualitative and quantitative indicators (OLIVEIRA; GADELHA; COSTA, 2014).
The qualitative indicator comes from qualitative research conducted in Recife, which showed that
voters considered Eduardo Campos a worker governor dedicated to the public cause. The quantitative
indicator comes from the approval of its management ahead of Pernambuco government.
10
The explanation for mechanisms require robust empirical evidence (HEDSTRÖM; YLIKOSKI, 2010).
The authors thank Cenário Inteligência and IPMN for making available the research for the preparation of this article
12
Quantitative Qualitative surveys were conducted in the state of Pernambuco. Qualitative research was conducted using
the methodology Focus Group, i.e. focus groups in eight cities of Pernambuco. In each city, four groups were set up. It is
noteworthy that the authors of this article had the opportunity to participate as mediators groups. Quantitative research
had previously defined sampling plan and 2,500 questionnaires were applied among Pernambuco voters in all regions of
the state.
13
Due to this work is a case study and the presence of Eduardismo variables, Lulismo and electoral commotion, it was
decided to use descriptive statistics. Through it shows the presence among voters of the aforementioned variables. The
descriptive statistics and qualitative data use allowed the economical and behavior of voters efficient explanation during
the course, where this, events have occurred and influenced the voters’ decision.
14
Recife is the capital of the state of Pernambuco (TN).
11
47
In September 2012, Eduardo was approved by 80% (excellent / good) of Recife voters (OLIVEIRA;
GADELHA; COSTA, 2014).15 Therefore, the ingredients that integrate the Eduardismo are "worker
Governor", "Governor dedicated to the public cause" and governor with high approval.16
When Paulo Câmara was chosen by Eduardo Campos, in February 2014, as a candidate for governor,
Eduardo Campos government had the Pernambuco voters 57% approval.17 Qualitative research
conducted among Pernambuco voters revealed that the governor Eduardo Campos was recognized as
a politician who "changed Pernambuco for the better in recent years," as "a great governor" as well
as "work", "dedicated to the public cause" and "possess social sensitivity".18
Data suggest the Eduardismo presence in part of Pernambuco voters in the 2014 election. It was
therefore plausible to consider, before the official campaign period, that Eduardismo could influence
Paulo Câmara electoral success, as well as with the Geraldo Julio mayor of Recife candidate in the
election.
Three indicators strengthen the Eduardismo presence thesis in the 2014 election. The first indicator
is the saudades19 feeling.20 Such an indicator suggests that voters may have missed a manager if he is
no longer a candidate for reelection. Given this premise, Maurício de Nassau Research Institute
(IPMN) and Cenário Intelligência researches, from April to August 2014, they sought to determine
whether voters would miss Governor Eduardo Campos, since he could no longer be a government of
Pernambuco candidate
In Graphic 1 , which presents research conducted by the day before the governor Eduardo Campos
death, it shows that in April, 42% of suffragettes said they "feel saudades" of Eduardo Campos
management; 26% stressed that "did not feel saudades" and 24% emphasized be indifferent.
The variable “feeling saudades” presents drop until early July, and grow back in late July, but declines
again. The variable "feeling saudades" presents positive growth, but at no time exceeds the indicator
"miss". Such a move suggests the electoral strength of Eduardo Campos, but also the electoral
strength of opposition candidate.
15
Research conducted by Cenário Inteligência in Recife on September 26, 2012
Cenário Inteligência reseach on September 26, 2012 in Recife.
17
Research conducted by the Maurício de Nassau Research Institute on April 7 and 8, 2014 in the state of Pernambuco.
18
Qualitative research conducted by Cenário Inteligência in several cities in the state of Pernambuco between 30 May
2014 and June 3rd 2014
19
In portuguese, saudades means a huge feeling of missing a person or something. (TN)
20
People may have the saudades feeling towards something or some event. The saudades feeling suggests living
memory of something. Saudade is a feeling that born from memory, experience and the experience of the individual
with something in their life trajectory (DAMATTA, 1993). If individuals feel saudades because of memory, this means
that certain events are present on their constant or sporadic memory and it can motivate remembrance and Saudades.
Driven by saudades, individuals can act in searching something (DAMATTA, 1993).
16
48
Source: IPMN Research and Cenário Inteligência, 2014.
GRAPHIC 1
Saudade, "Eduardo Campos can no longer be candidate for the government of Pernambuco. He will be missed".
Voters may be "enthusiastic" about voting for a contestant. Being enthusiastic or not represent the
suffragist state of mind. Voters may be enthusiastic for change. In this case, they wish to vote for
opposition candidates. Or the opposite: voters may be excited to vote for a contestant who represent
the government continuity (PIMENTEL JR, 2010.).
What is the suffragist’s enthusiasm to vote for a candidate supported by Governor Eduardo Campos
or an opposition candidate? Graphic 2 presents that the enthusiasm to vote in a candidate supported
by Governor Eduardo Campos showed variations in the electoral path. However, the enthusiasm in
voting for the opposition candidate was growing. The indifferent voters decline. The last research
conducted before the Governor Eduardo Campos death shows that the enthusiastic voters’ percentage
to vote for an opposition candidate grows and ties with enthusiastic voters to vote for the candidate
supported by Eduardo Campos. Again, the data suggest Eduardo Campos’ electoral influence ability
and the opposition candidate electoral strength.
GRAPHIC 2
Enthusiasm: "This year there will be elections for the government of Pernambuco. Are you excited to vote for a
candidate?"
49
In your view, Pernambuco changed for better in the last years? If so, it changed with whom? In your
view, Pernambuco continue changing for better in the coming years? If so, with whom? Graphic 3
shows that, at first, voters do not recognize at most that Pernambuco changed in the last years.
However, the following research shows suffragettes toggle opinion. On Eduardo Campos death eve,
47% of suffragists claimed that Pernambuco has not changed, and 45% answered that it changed. It
is noted that the recognition that increased Pernambuco did not changed.
GRAPHIC 3
Change in Pernambuco: "Has Pernambuco change for better in the last years?”
In the voters’ universe who recognize that Pernambuco changed for better in recent years, Eduardo
Campos is pointed to be the main change agent driver (Graphic 4). Eduardo Campos gets high
percentage. Lula and Dilma win lower percentage than Eduardo. However, by adding their
percentages in research, they get close to Eduardo Campos’ percentage. Such a sum is not arbitrary
act, because the qualitative research showed that voters recognize Lula and Dilma as unique ie
represent an electoral consortium. In this case, for part of the suffragettes Pernambuco, Lula and
Dilma "worked for Pernambuco" and "who votes in Dilma is voting in Lula."
The electoral consortium Lula and Dilma, which is detected among voters, shows the Lulismo
presence in Pernambuco electorate. The Lulismo have be understood similarly to Eduardismo,
namely: is the ability of former President Lula to influence voters' choices. The Lulismo born from
social and economic transformations that have taken place in Brazil during Luis Inácio Lula da Silva
presidential term. These changes enabled the Brazilian voters’ majority part blame Lula for them.
Responsibility has enabled the Lulismo origin. (OLIVEIRA, 2011; SINGER, 2009).
50
GRAPHIC 4
Responsible: "If so, who was largely responsible for this change?"
Voters believe overwhelmingly that Pernambuco will continue changing for better (Graphic 5).
The question "If so, with whom Pernambuco can continue changing for better?" Had to supplement
earlier about change and, therefore, to check the electoral strength of Eduardo Campos among
Pernambuco (Graphic 6).
75%
80%
77%
81%
77%
11%
9%
10%
11%
16%
MAY
26 e 27
JULY
05 e 06
JULY
21 e 22
JULY
28 e 29
YES
AUGUST
11 e 12
NO
GRAPHIC 5
Will Pernambuco continue changing? "Do you believe that Pernambuco will continue to change for the better?"
Thus, it was found that among the candidates for governor of Pernambuco, Armando Monteiro, in
the research series until the PSB presidential candidate death , it is recognized by most of the
suffragettes as the main actor who can do Pernambuco continue to change better. It is observed that
the Armando percentage is growing. Paulo Câmara ranks second and their percentages presented
fluctuations (Graphic 6).
51
GRAPHIC 6
Who continues changing Pernambuco: "Who will continue to change Pernambuco for better?"
The missing indicators, enthusiasm and change suggest the existence and Eduardismo strength. The
shift indicator also suggests the presence and the ability to influence the Lulismo on voters.
Therefore, it was found that prior to the death of Edward fields, the Eduardismo and Lulismo exist.
In this sense, it was plausible to think the Eduardismo could influence the voters’ choice, as well as
Lulismo.
2.1 EDUARDISMO VERSUS LULISMO
Before Eduardo Campos’s death, Paulo Câmara reported low percentage of voting intentions. His
opponent, Senator Armando Monteiro – supported by the former President Lula and the President
Dilma Rousseff, candidate for re-election – leaded the race (Graphic 7).
GRAPHIC 7
Voting intention for governor: "This year there will be elections for state-governor. If elections were today, in which of
these candidates would you vote?" (Stimulated).
Such leadership had an initial and apparent cause. The governor's candidate Eduardo Campos had
high percentages of lack of knowledge among voters. In April, month that Paulo Câmara was
presented as Governor Eduardo Campos candidate, 46% of voters stated knowing him. Such
52
percentages suffered variations during the electoral path. On the eve of Governor Eduardo Campos
death, 39% of voters claimed to know Paulo Câmara and 52% stressed not knowing.
On the other hand, his opponent, Senator Armando Monteiro (PTB), started the electoral process with
high percentage level of knowledge among voters. In April 83% claimed to know the PTB’s
candidate. In August 77% said they knew him and 7% said they did not (Graphic 8).
GRAPHIC 8
The candidate's level of knowledge: "What is your level of knowledge about these politicians?"
The percentage of knowledge of the two main candidates for the Pernambuco government suggests
the following hypotheses:
 The low percentage of Paulo Câmara voting intentions was motivated by the high percentage of
voters who did not know him;
 In this way, as Paulo Câmara increased its level of knowledge among the suffragists, he would
tend to conquer voters due to Eduardismo’s presence in part of the electorate.
Such hypotheses, expressed in the form of causal mechanisms in which the independent variable is
the level of knowledge, acquire plausibility facing the following information: on the eve of Governor
Eduardo Campos’ death, 29.5% of voters said that Paulo Câmara was the governor’s candidate.
However, 65% claimed not knowing who was his candidate, as shown in Cenário Inteligência’s
research held on 12 and 13 August in Pernambuco.
In this research, 31.9% of voters declared that Senator Armando Monteiro was the candidate for
Pernambuco’s government supported by former President Lula and President Dilma Rousseff and
64% of voters stated not knowing who was the former president and Dilma Rousseff’s candidate.
The following data must also be considered: according to 37% of the voters, the best for
Pernambuco’s future was the victory of governor’s candidate supported by former President Lula and
by President Dilma Rousseff, and 26% said that the best to Pernambuco was the electoral success of
the Governor Eduardo Campos candidate. Thus, the leadership of Armando Monteiro is explained
because of Lulismo and its high percentage of knowledge, as seen in Graphic 8. The data presented
suggest that it was plausible to consider, before Governor Eduardo Campos death, the possibility of
Armando Monteiro extend his lead over Paulo Câmara or maintain percentage stability supported on
53
Lulismo. It was also important to consider another possibility: the presidential candidacy of Eduardo
Campos and his support to Paulo Câmara candidacy as Pernambuco’s governor provided the
"federalization" of state’s dispute, i.e., Eduardo Campos and Paulo Câmara versus Lula/Dilma and
Armando Monteiro.
The dispute’s federalization meant that the performance of Paulo Câmara strongly depended on
Eduardo Campos’s national performance in the presidential race. Therefore, the following
mechanism could be observed: the electoral growth of Eduardo Campos among Pernambuco’s voters
(independent variable) would provide the conquest of voters by Paulo Câmara (dependent variable).
Similarly, the electoral strength of Armando Monteiro depended on Lula’s and Dilma’s performance
in the presidential race, particularly among Pernambuco’s voters. In this case, the electoral growth of
Dilma/Lula (independent variable) would provide the achievement or maintenance of voters by
Armando Monteiro (dependent variable).
The presented mechanisms suggest that Eduardismo and Lulismo could confront in the
Pernambuco’s governor election, 2014. Thereby, the dispute would not be "estadualizada"21, i.e.,
restricted between Paulo Câmara and Armando Monteiro, but also between Lula/Dilma versus
Eduardo Campos. Therefore, the dispute of Pernambuco’s government would be federalized.
The following information supports the plausibility of the arguments:




On the eve of Eduardo Campos’ death, the voters, at the recall that Armando Monteiro was the
candidate supported by Lula and Dilma, and Paulo Câmara was the competitor backed up by
Eduardo Campos, expressed as follows: 40% stated vote intention for Armando Monteiro and
20% chose to vote for Paulo Câmara;22
In July, 77.5% of voters stated that Lula was the best president for Pernambuco, and 36.1%
considered Eduardo Campos as the best governor of Pernambuco’s History;23
In August, before Governor Eduardo Campos death, 37% of voters claimed that the best for
Pernambuco was the victory of the candidate supported by Lula and Dilma, against 26% of voters
who stated prefer the electoral success of the Governor’s Eduardo Campos candidate;24
Various qualitative researches displayed an admiration of Pernambuco’s voters on Lula, in
particular, residents in regions of “agreste” and “sertão”25. For them, Brazil and Pernambuco grew
because of Lula's dedication to the state, and Eduardo "owes much" to the dedication of the
"former president" to Pernambuco;26
The arguments presented encourage presenting the performance, among Pernambuco voters, of the
presidential candidates Dilma Rousseff and Eduardo Campos (Graphic 9). The PSB candidate led the
presidential race in April. However, he declined. Unlike the PT candidate, who increased her vote
intentions and entered the month of August, in particular, on the eve of Eduardo Campos death,
leading the presidential race in Pernambuco.
TN: this part means that the electoral dispute will not be restricted to the state level (“estadualizada”).
Survey conducted by Enterprise Cenário Inteligência on 11 and 12 August in the state of Pernambuco.
23
Research conducted by Cenário Inteligência on 5 and 6 July in Pernambuco.
24
Research conducted by Cenário Inteligência on 11 and 12 August in Pernambuco.
25
TN: “agreste” and “sertão” are two geographic divisions of Pernambuco’s state where weather and social conditions
are precarious
26
Various qualitative surveys conducted by Cenário Inteligência, among Pernambuco’s voters from June to August.
21
22
54
GRAPHIC 9
Voting intention for president, "This year there will be elections for president. If the election were today, in which of
these candidates would you vote?"
Table 1 shows that in August, before Eduardo Campos death, Dilma Rousseff was leading the
presidential race with 36% of voting intentions. Armando Monteiro led with 38% for the
Pernambuco’s government. In the universe of PT voters for presidency (36%), Armando had 57% of
voting intentions against 6% of Paulo Câmara.27
TABLE 1
Voting intention for president and Pernambuco’s government: "This year there will be elections for president. If the
election were today, in which of these candidates would you vote?"
THIS YEAR THERE WILL BE ELECTION FOR PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC. IF
ELECTION WERE TODAY, IN WHICH OF THESE CANDIDATES WOULD YOU
VOTE? (2014)
BASIS
TOTAL
DILMA ROUSSEFF
EDUARDO CAMPOS
100%
36%
30%
Armando Monteiro
38%
57%
33%
Paulo Câmara
14%
6%
32%
2%
2%
3%
25%
19%
16%
17%
15%
Others
Blank ballot/invalid vote/none
DK/DA *
21%
*Did not know/answer
Source: Research held by Cenário Inteligência, 2014.28
Eduardo Campos had 30% of voting intentions for presidency among Pernambuco voters. In the
universe of PSB voters for the presidency (30%), Armando Monteiro held 33% of voting intentions
against 32% of voting intentions for Paulo Câmara.
27
28
Research conducted by Cenário Inteligência on 11 and 12 August in Pernambuco.
TN:”NS/NR” means that the person who answered to the survey didn’t know or didn’t say who its vote would go to.
55
The data presented in Table 1 suggest an association between the votes of the president and the
governor. Therefore, the hypothesis presented in the Eduardismo and Lulismo would face in the
Pernambuco’s government dispute is feasible. So, who would win the race for governor: Paulo
Câmara or Armando Monteiro?
2.3 ELECTORAL COMMOTION AND LULISMO “EXIT”
After Governor’s Eduardo Campos death, the percentage of voters who thought Pernambuco changed
for good in recent years increased in comparison to the period before the PSB’s presidential candidate
death, the August 13th, as mentioned before. The percentage of voters who recognized that Eduardo
Campos was responsible for changes in Pernambuco also increased and suffragists, mostly, continued
optimistic about the future, i.e., that Pernambuco would continue changing for the best (Graphics 10,
11, 12).29
GRAPHIC 10
Has Pernambuco changed? "In your opinion, Pernambuco changed for the best in recent years?"
GRAPHIC 11
Responsibility for the change: "If so, who was largely responsible for this change?"
29
After Eduardo Campos’ death, researchers of Cenário Inteligência and of IPMN didn’t ask to the voter about feelings
of missing or enthusiasm.
56
GRAPHIC 12
Will Pernambuco keep changing? "Do you believe that Pernambuco will continue to change for the best?"
However, there were two important events after Eduardo Campos death. The first was the raise of the
percentage of voters who pointed Paulo Câmara as the continuity of change.
This increase enabled the PSB candidate's overtaking of Armando Monteiro in this regard. The
percentages of Lula and Dilma added as change actors decreased, and the suffragists didn’t suggest
the name of Eduardo Campos (Graphic 13).
GRAPHIC 13
Who will keep on changing Pernambuco: "Who Pernambuco will continue to change for the best?"
The second relevant fact was the considerable raise in the percentage of voters who claimed to
know Paulo Câmara as candidate for Pernambuco’s government (Graphic 14).
57
GRAPHIC 14
Level of knowledge about Paulo Câmara: "What is your level of knowledge about these politicians".
The data presented show that Eduardo Campos death changed voter’s opinion, benefiting electorally
Paulo Câmara. These data, therefore, suggest that an electoral commotion arose. Electoral commotion
that is being defined here as an influence in the voters’ choice caused by the tragic death of Eduardo
Campos. If it was just commotion, it would not have influenced the views of voters.
Changes in voters opinion reflected in voting intentions. After Eduardo Campos death, his candidate,
Paulo Câmara, grew and exceeded the competitor Armando Monteiro and won the election. The
vigorous growth of PSB's candidate showed the rise and the effect of electoral commotion on voters
(Graphic 15).
GRAPHIC 15
Voting intention for governor: "This year there will be election for state-governor. If the election were today, in which
of these candidates would you vote?" (Stimulated).
In order to prove the origin and the effects of the election commotion about the suffragettes, the
following data, collected among voters after Eduardo Campos death are presented:
58




Sixty-three and a half percent (63.5%) state that Eduardo Campos was the best governor of
Pernambuco’s History. Before the presidential candidate Eduardo Campos death, he was
considered by 36.1% as the best governor of Pernambuco’s History;30
By being reminded of Eduardo Campos death, 48% of voters said that Pernambuco should vote
for the candidate to Pernambuco’s government supported by him;
Ninety percent (90%) stated that Eduardo Campos was an excellent/good governor;
Forty percent (40%) claimed that Pernambuco should vote for gratitude in the governor Eduardo
Campos candidate.31
Table 2 shows the impact of Governor Eduardo Campos death in his image.32 The statements
contained in Table 2, which express the opinions of suffragists, presents that positive aspects were
strongly associated to the image of the governor of Pernambuco after his death. The data in Table 2
and the ones shown above in Table 1 confirm the appearance of the electoral commotion.
TABLE 2
Image of Eduardo Campos in Pernambuco: "Last week, the governor Eduardo Campos died as a result of a plane crash.
Faced this news, opine about the following statements."
IMAGE OF EDUARDO CAMPOS IN PERNAMBUCO (2014)
STATEMENT
AGREE
PARTIALLY AGREE
DISAGREE
DK/DA*
86%
10%
1%
3%
86%
11%
1%
2%
86%
10%
2%
3%
85%
12%
1%
2%
Eduardo Campos contributed to
the success of Pernambuco
83%
13%
1%
3%
As one from Pernambuco, I was
proud of Eduardo Campos
80%
14%
3%
3%
Eduardo Campos was a great
Brazilian
Pernambuco lost a great
political leader
Brazil lost a politician with a
great future
Eduardo Campos was a major
Pernambuco politician
*Did not know/answer
Source: Research held by Cenário Inteligência, 2014.
As part of the presidential race, it is observed that Marina Silva (PSB) –, substitute of Eduardo
Campos as presidency candidate –, in the first survey held in Pernambuco after governor Eduardo
Campos death, she appears with a large advantage over the candidate Dilma Rousseff – 45% versus
30%, respectively. In future research, the presidential candidate of the PT grows and exceeds Marina.
This only occurs due to the small decline in Marina electoral trajectory (Graphic 16).
30
Search by Cenário Inteligência on 5 and 6 July in Pernambuco.
These last three are the search results from Cenário Inteligência on 18 and 19 August.
32
Search by Cenário Inteligência on 18 and 19 August.
31
59
GRAPHIC 16
Voting Intention for president, "This year there will election for president. If the election were today, in which of these
candidates would you vote?"
Marina Silva gets in Pernambuco, in the first round, 48.05% of the votes. Rousseff had 44.02%. The
electoral success of Marina Silva and Paulo Câmara among Pernambuco suffragettes shows that
Eduardo Campos death made possible the emergence of an electoral commotion.
3
CONCLUSION
What motivated the electoral success of Paulo Câmara in the election for Pernambuco’s government?
The Eduardismo, electoral commotion and "exit" of Lulismo were the variables that led to the PSB
candidate's victory. Each variable served at different times. But the Eduardismo operated at various
times and suffered strengthening process after Governor Eduardo Campos death.33 Before the death
of the presidential candidate of the PSB, the Eduardismo existed, but it could suffer competition from
Lulismo. The competition with Lulismo was able to affect the Eduardismo strength on voters because
of the dispute to the government of Pernambuco could turn out to be federalized, namely: Eduardo
and Paulo Câmara versus Lula, Dilma and Armando Monteiro.
The governor Eduardo Campos death raised the electoral commotion, which strengthened the ability
of Eduardismo to influence voters. Such reinforcement contributed to the "exit" of Lulismo the state
election, i.e., a majority of voters chose to vote for Eduardo Campos candidate for Pernambuco’s
government.
This phenomenon also occurred in the presidential race. The Pernambuco suffragists voted
overwhelmingly in Marina Silva. But the Lulismo continued to have power to influence voters in the
national election. It is observed that Paulo Câmara won Armando Monteiro by a wide margin.
Contrary to what occurred in the dispute between Marina Silva and Dilma Rousseff.
Therefore, the hypotheses initially presented are ratified in this conclusion, i.e.:
33
The explanation for mechanisms, which is used in this article, considers that causal variables can act in different
moments in a career. Accordingly, the first mechanism can enable the engine 2. In addition, the present causes the
engine 1 are not necessarily required and, in Mechanism 2 (HEDSTRÖM; YLIKOSKI, 2010).
60



The Eduardismo conditioned the electoral success of Paulo Câmara;
The election commotion caused due to the unexpected and tragic death of Eduardo Campos made
possible the electoral success of Paulo Câmara;
The absence of confrontation between Lulismo and Eduardismo allowed the victory of Paulo
Câmara.
In this sense, is observed the following mechanism: the influence of Eduardismo on voters existed,
and was reinforced by the emergence of electoral commotion. This, in turn, enabled the
“estadualização” campaign, in this case, the "exit" of the strength of Lulismo in state dispute. With
this, Paulo Câmara won the election.
4
REFERENCES
BORGES, André. Desenvolvendo argumentos teóricos a partir de estudos de caso: o debate recente
em torno da pesquisa histórico-comparativa. In: SIMPÓSIO NACIONAL DE HISTÓRIA, 24, 2007,
São Leopoldo, RS. Anais... São Leopoldo, RS: ANPUH, 2007.
ELSTER, Jon. El cambio tecnológico: investigaciones sobre la racionalidad y la transformación
social. Traducción de Margarita Mizraji. 5. ed. Barcelona: Gedisa, 2006.
FIGUEIREDO FILHO, Dalson Britto; ROCHA, Enivaldo Carvalho da; SILVA JÚNIOR, José
Alexandre da; PARANHOS, Ranulfo. Causalidade e mecanismos em ciência política. Mediações:
Revista de Ciências Sociais, Londrina, v. 18, n. 2, p. 10-27, jul.-dez. 2013.
GUSMÃO, Luís de. O fetichismo do conceito: limites do conhecimento teórico na investigação social.
Rio de Janeiro: TopBooks, 2012.
HEDSTRÖM, Peter; YLIKOSKI, Petri. Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. The Annual
Review of Sociology, n. 36, p. 49-67, 2010.
OLIVEIRA, Adriano. Da praxeologia do eleitor à ciência eleitoral. In: OLIVEIRA, Adriano. (Org.).
Eleições não são para principiantes: interpretando eventos eleitorais no Brasil. Curitiba, PR: Juruá,
2014.
______. O Lulismo e as suas manifestações no eleitorado. Revista Debates, Porto Alegre, v. 5, n. 1,
p. 115-138, jul.- dez. 2011.
______; GADELHA, Carlos; COSTA, Simara. A eleição municipal do Recife: “petismo”,
“Eduardismo” e neodeterminantes do voto. In: OLIVEIRA, Adriano (Org.). Eleições não são para
principiantes: interpretando eventos eleitorais no Brasil. Curitiba, PR: Juruá, 2014.
PERISSINOTTO, Renato. Comparação, história e interpretação: por uma ciência política históricointerpretativa. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, v. 28, n. 83, out. 2013.
PIMENTEL JÚNIOR, Jairo Tadeu Pires. Razão e emoção: o voto na eleição presidencial de 2006.
Opinião Pública, Campinas, v. 16, n. 2, p. 516-541, nov. 2010.
61
SINGER, André. As raízes sociais e ideológicas do Lulismo. Novos Estudos, n. 85, p. 82-103, dez.
2009. Disponível em: <http://novosestudos.uol.com.br/acervo/acervo_artigoasp?idMateria =1356>.
Acesso em: 14 fev. 2010.
TAIPA, Jorge R. B.; GOMES, Eduardo R. Ideias, interesses e mudanças institucionais. Tempo Social:
Revista de Sociologia da USP, v. 20, n. 1, p. 239-264, jun. 2008.
VEYNE, Paul Marie. Como se escreve a história: Foucault revoluciona a história. Tradução de Alda
Baltar e Maria Auxiliadora Kneipp. Brasília, DF: UnB, 2008.
62

Eduardismo, Lulismo “Exit” and Election Commotion

Transcrição

Documentos relacionados

Learning Online Environment for an Extra Curricular Course in

EVALUATING BIOCHEMICAL INTERNET RESOURCES Lima, R.M.

Senior digital designer Skills Relevant Professional Experience

Detecting multiple DNA human profile from a mosquito blood meal

5. green passaport. map games in pernambuco

© 2006, Global Shark Accident File. All rights reserved. This report

Subject of the Internship: [236] "Extending CHR with Components"

ALÁFIA – release 2015

PDF Information

Aláfia RELEASE ENGLISH