Nassif sees enormous risk in Marina's government.

247 - No. GGNLuis Nassif warns of the "enormous risk" of a Marina Silva government and says that what lies behind her popularity is the aging of political parties, which have distanced themselves from intellectuals and the sentiment of the streets. Read more:

The Marina factor and the aging of political parties.

On Twitter, Xico Graziano was thrilled with the IBOPE news about the surge in support for Marina Silva's candidacy, despite it potentially being the final nail in the coffin for his party's candidacy. He's not a conventional tweeter, but a trusted advisor of Fernando Henrique Cardoso, who was even considered to manage Aécio Neves's social media campaign.

Their enthusiasm is an eloquent demonstration of the lack of substance in the opposition's discourse. For these twelve years, they have limited themselves to brandishing an anachronistic "destroy the PT" instead of seeking a new discourse.

***

Don't even think that there was any innovation on the PT's side.

The June 2013 protests could have been a gift for the party and for Dilma. More than a year in advance, the warning came from the streets: the people already have bread, they already have schools, they already have electricity; what's missing is participation.

***

It was known that, once the inclusion cycle – promoted by Lula and Dilma's social policies – was complete, a new citizen would emerge, more demanding of public services, more aware of their own rights, and more skeptical of the conventional institutions of representative democracy.

***

The Marina Silva wave is the greatest proof of how the parties – both the PT and the PSDB – have distanced themselves from intellectuals and the sentiment of the streets.

Nowadays, it's common to hear party leaders criticizing Dilma for not properly interpreting the sentiment on the streets. But the PT itself treated popular dissatisfaction as an attempted coup, either by the right or by far-left groups. Anyone who dared to legitimize the dissatisfaction on the streets was ostracized. They judged that the new citizen would still take a few years to emerge. They had no sense of urgency whatsoever.

Moreover, they haven't even managed to publicize – so far – the undeniable progress that has occurred in various public policies.

***

As for the PSDB, it goes without saying. Since Mário Covas, the party has completely lost its connection with the people. The June protests only warranted a few obvious analyses from FHC and no action whatsoever.

***

With this widespread insensitivity, the banner of deepening democracy and digital democracy became exclusive to Marina Silva – strengthened by the demonization of politics sponsored all these years by media groups.

A potential Marina Silva government would be a huge risk for the country. Analysts are already comparing it to Jânio Quadros and Fernando Collor – due to its isolation, lack of party structure, inability to navigate political maneuvering, and the absence of a broader national vision.

Dilma and Aécio represent clear and well-known economic policy proposals. Marina, on the other hand, is surrounded by absolutely heterogeneous groups, ranging from market "operators" (in the worst sense), such as André Lara Rezende, to a certain more modern São Paulo industrial business class, the nationalists of the PSB, and reputable private sector NGOs. Together, they do not form a unified project.

Moreover, Marina's personality hovers over this shapeless orchestra.

She is immensely more stubborn and less prepared than Dilma. She has far less political skill and ability to choose a team than Aécio.

The growth of his candidacy is not a will-o'-the-wisp, like so many others in the country's recent history. There's no doubt that the wave will recede. The only question is whether it will recede before the elections are over.

But his election is undeniably a very high-risk gamble.