The opponents of online betting in Brazil, who made it a major point on the campaign trail, were not successful in the first round of the elections in making this issue an electoral priority. Several politicians, who were supporters of betting restrictions, were defeated or came in last in the elections, from Rio de Janeiro to Rio Grande do Sul.
Online betting was banned on September 25, just nine days before the election, by the signing of Provisional Measure No. 1,394/2026 by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The issue was picked up as a campaign talking point in the last week as candidates from across several states picked up on it. The findings indicated, however, that there was no clear relationship between support for restrictions and votes.
Rio de Janeiro Delivers a Major Reversal
Meanwhile, in Rio de Janeiro, PSD candidate Eduardo Paes said he would end the state lottery company called Loterj and blamed the Bolsonaro government for creating a “betting paradise.” Datafolha, which conducted the first poll before the elections, gave Paes 46% of valid votes and Douglas Ruas (PL) 38%. Those rankings were overturned at first count, and eventually by an additional recount, with Ruas’ total rising again as the Electoral Court ruled to invalidate Anthony Garotinho’s candidacy and annul his 274,411 votes.
After the recount, Ruas got 50.88%, and Paes got 44.16% of the valid votes. Federal deputy Pedro Paulo (PSD), who was Paes’s ally, did not get elected to the Senate either. The anti-betting campaign, however, failed to pay off in the clearest of examples, in one of the clearest examples of the strategy.
Similar Outcomes Across Brazilian States
Patrus Ananias (PT), who called the ban “a new beginning” for families, garnered some 26% of votes cast in Minas Gerais. Governor Mateus Simões (PSD), who had limited adverts for games in stadiums and announced R$32 million in help for clubs, got under 5%. Cleitinho Azevedo (Republicanos), a critic of betting who mostly avoided the subject in his campaign, came out on top, around 55%.
Juliana Brizola (PDT) won around 32% in Rio Grande do Sul, after campaigning for the measure, whereas Marcelo Maranata (PSDB) ended up below 2%. Luciano Zucco (PL), who described the measure as a “clear act of electoral desperation,” won the approval by about 58%. In Paraná, Requião Filho (PDT) was defeated by Sergio Moro (PL), who captured 50.10%. Anti-betting candidate Ciro Gomes (PSDB) received 46.52% in Ceará.
There were exceptions. Jerônimo Rodrigues (PT), who was present to welcome Lula’s decision, was re-elected as Bahia’s governor with 55.80%. In Pernambuco, Raquel Lyra (PSD) who spoke positively about the president’s “taking up this fight” and offered financial aid to sports clubs, received 53.25%. Both were serving their second terms.
Polls Showed Limited Influence on Voting Decisions
There had been a gap between popular support for a ban on betting and the impact on voting intentions, revealed by pre-election polls. According to BNLData research, 68.1% of the beneficiaries of social programs interviewed by Cruz Consulting/ANJL stated that the stance on betting would not influence their vote. The Indexa/Broadcast survey revealed that 70% were in favour of a ban, but 63% said it had no impact on their voting choice.
A study by a social survey group called “More in Common” and Ipsos-Ipec revealed that 58% of Brazilian voters would not vote differently if they knew they could bet on the results. Palver reported that just 1% of respondents were considering voting differently after the ban. Datafolha separately recorded 78% of support for the ban on October 1, among which 70% of Flávio Bolsonaro’s voters.
Potential Costs for Lula’s Presidential Campaign
Flávio Bolsonaro (PL) led the way to the October 25 runoff for Lula. Rumors started to circulate among members of the president’s campaign that the ban had negatively impacted his political chances, and Lula has not spoken publicly about the ban since the first round.
The measure was a “shot in the foot”, said Revista Oeste’s interview with Murilo Hidalgo, president of Paraná Pesquisas. The president’s Friday decree, he said, “was a shot in the foot today and it had a bad effect, especially among fans and amongst teams. The government’s decision to end discussion of the measure was telling, Hidalgo added: “They are no longer talking about it.”
The results do not leave much room for doubt about the electoral implications of the ban, but the first-round results of any available survey have not been found to show a causal connection between the ban and the results.
