Nearly half the electorate actively opposes him
Com dezoito meses de antecedência, a corrida presidencial brasileira de 2026 já revela suas tensões mais profundas: Lula lidera o primeiro turno com folga, mas enfrenta um eleitorado rachado ao meio que, diante de uma escolha binária, transforma vantagem em empate. Uma pesquisa Real Time Big Data, encomendada pela CNN Brasil, coloca o presidente à frente de Flávio Bolsonaro nos cenários iniciais, enquanto as simulações de segundo turno expõem a fragilidade de uma liderança construída sobre rejeições quase simétricas. O Brasil de 2026 não escolhe ainda um caminho — ele hesita, dividido entre dois polos que metade do país preferiria evitar.
- Lula chega a 40% no primeiro turno contra 34% de Flávio Bolsonaro, uma vantagem real, mas que dissolve quando a disputa se torna cara a cara.
- No segundo turno simulado, Flávio numericamente supera Lula por 44% a 43% — uma inversão que, dentro da margem de erro, transforma liderança em empate técnico.
- A rejeição é o dado mais explosivo: 44% dos eleitores não querem Lula, 41% não querem Flávio — números que aniquilam qualquer outro candidato na comparação.
- Ciro Gomes, Caiado e Zema aparecem como alternativas, mas nenhum rompe o duopólio da polarização; o campo permanece fluido e sem herdeiro consolidado.
- Com 18 meses até a eleição, a corrida é menos uma disputa de preferências do que uma guerra de rejeições — quem construir coalizões mais amplas definirá o resultado.
Uma pesquisa Real Time Big Data divulgada nesta terça-feira, conduzida entre 2 e 4 de maio com 2.000 eleitores e encomendada pela CNN Brasil, oferece o retrato mais nítido até agora da eleição presidencial de 2026 — e o que ela revela é uma competição muito mais apertada do que os números de primeiro turno sugerem.
Na medição espontânea, Lula registra 31% contra 24% de Flávio Bolsonaro. Com a lista completa de candidatos, a vantagem cresce: 40% a 34% no primeiro cenário, 38% a 33% no segundo. Margens consistentes, mas que escondem uma vulnerabilidade estrutural exposta pelas simulações de segundo turno.
Nos cinco cenários de runoff testados pelo instituto, o quadro muda radicalmente. Contra Flávio, Lula perde numericamente por 43% a 44% — um empate técnico dentro da margem de dois pontos percentuais, mas uma inversão simbólica relevante. Contra Ciro Gomes e Ronaldo Caiado, Lula empata. Apenas diante de Renan Santos ele abre vantagem clara, com 48% a 24%.
O dado mais revelador, porém, é a rejeição. Lula é o candidato que os eleitores mais não querem, com 44%; Flávio vem logo atrás, com 41%. O terceiro colocado nessa lista, Ciro Gomes, registra apenas 5% — uma distância que ilustra o grau de polarização em torno dos dois líderes. Quase metade do eleitorado se opõe ativamente a cada um dos favoritos, o que transforma o segundo turno numa disputa de coalizões tanto quanto de convicções.
A pesquisa foi registrada no Tribunal Superior Eleitoral e opera com 95% de confiança. Mas nenhuma metodologia resolve a tensão central que os números expõem: Lula parte na frente, Flávio Bolsonaro consolida-se como principal desafiante, e o eleitorado brasileiro, com um ano e meio pela frente, ainda procura uma saída para uma escolha que, para muitos, parece inevitável e indesejada ao mesmo tempo.
A new survey released Tuesday by Real Time Big Data offers the clearest picture yet of how Brazil's 2026 presidential race is taking shape—and it reveals a contest far more competitive than first-round numbers suggest. The polling, conducted between May 2 and 4 among 2,000 voters and commissioned by CNN Brasil, shows Lula commanding a commanding position in initial voting scenarios while facing a much tighter contest if the race goes to a runoff.
In the most straightforward measure—when voters are asked to name their preferred candidate without prompting—Lula holds 31 percent support compared to Flávio Bolsonaro's 24 percent. The gap widens when the institute presents voters with a full slate of candidates. In the first such scenario, Lula reaches 40 percent while Flávio captures 34 percent, a five-point advantage. In a second configuration, Lula draws 38 percent to Flávio's 33 percent. These margins are consistent and meaningful, but they also mask something the runoff simulations make unmistakably clear: the race is far from settled.
When Real Time Big Data modeled five different second-round matchups, the picture shifted dramatically. In a hypothetical runoff between Lula and Flávio, the numbers nearly reverse. Flávio would receive 44 percent to Lula's 43 percent—a numerical lead, though one that falls within the poll's two-point margin of error, making it statistically a tie. Against other potential opponents, Lula fares better. He would tie with Ciro Gomes at 43 percent each, tie with Ronaldo Caiado at 43 to 42 percent, and tie with Romeu Zema at 43 to 39 percent. Only against Renan Santos does Lula achieve clear separation, winning 48 to 24 percent.
What emerges from these numbers is a portrait of an electorate deeply divided and highly polarized. When asked which candidate they most reject, voters named Lula 44 percent of the time and Flávio 41 percent of the time—figures that dwarf rejection rates for any other candidate. Ciro Gomes, the next most rejected figure, registers only 5 percent. This suggests that while Lula begins with an advantage in raw support, nearly half the electorate actively opposes him, creating vulnerability in a runoff where turnout and coalition-building become paramount.
The poll's methodology is sound. Real Time Big Data interviewed 2,000 people across three days in early May, with a confidence level of 95 percent and a margin of error of plus or minus two percentage points. The survey was registered with Brazil's Superior Electoral Court. Yet methodology alone cannot resolve the fundamental tension the numbers reveal: Lula leads in first-round scenarios, but the race tightens considerably when voters face a binary choice. With eighteen months remaining before the 2026 election, the trajectory remains uncertain. Flávio Bolsonaro has emerged as the principal challenger, but the field remains fluid, and the high rejection rates for both frontrunners suggest the electorate is still searching for alternatives.
Notable Quotes
The poll shows Lula commanding a position in initial voting scenarios while facing a much tighter contest if the race goes to a runoff— Real Time Big Data survey findings
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does Lula's first-round lead matter so little if he's essentially tied with Flávio in a runoff?
Because first-round dynamics and runoff dynamics are entirely different contests. In the first round, Lula benefits from name recognition and a consolidated base. But in a runoff, voters who scattered their support among other candidates have to choose. Some of those voters may prefer Flávio, or they may simply stay home.
The rejection numbers are striking—44 percent reject Lula, 41 percent reject Flávio. What does that tell us?
It tells you the electorate is fractured. These aren't small numbers. You have nearly half the country saying they actively don't want each of these men as president. That's not a normal political landscape. That's polarization.
If Lula is so rejected, why does he lead in first-round voting?
Because rejection and support aren't the same thing. Lula has a core of committed voters—31 percent name him spontaneously. But he also has voters who support him because they prefer him to the alternative, not because they love him. In a runoff against Flávio, some of those conditional supporters might not show up.
What about the other candidates—Caiado, Zema, Ciro? Are they real threats?
They're real in the sense that they tie with Lula in runoff scenarios. But they don't lead in first-round voting. They're beneficiaries of fragmentation. If the race consolidates around Lula and Flávio, as these numbers suggest it might, the others become less relevant.
So what's the story here? Is Lula winning or is the race wide open?
Both. Lula is winning right now. But the structure of the race—the high rejection, the tight runoff margins, the fragmented field—means that eighteen months is an eternity. A lot can change.