PESQUISA GENIAL/QUAEST: TARIFAÇO FORTALECE LULA, DESGASTA FLÁVIO E PIORA A IMAGEM DOS EUA

The latest round of the Genial/Quaest survey shows that the trade conflict with the United States is no longer a distant issue in foreign policy and has begun to influence the economic and electoral perceptions of Brazilians. Conducted between July 10 and 13, 2026, with 2,004 face-to-face interviews, the survey has a margin of error of two percentage points, a 95% confidence level, and registration number BR-07181/2026. The first trend is an increase in public awareness. In June, 48% said they knew about the new tariffs; in July, this percentage rose to 62%. At the same time, 63% now believe that the measures could harm their lives or those of their families, compared to 55% in the previous round. This data is politically relevant because it translates a diplomatic controversy into a concrete threat to employment, income, and the cost of living. In this environment, Lula wins the battle of narratives. The version claiming that Flávio Bolsonaro contributed to the tariff hike is considered more convincing by 51%, while 30% agree more with Flávio's version. Regarding the explanation of the causes of the tariffs, 49% side with Lula and 33% with his opponent. In both cases, the government's advantage has grown compared to June. The government is therefore able to frame the episode as a matter of national sovereignty and defense of Brazilian interests. Flávio faces an additional problem: his trip to the United States did not translate into a show of force. Only 43% knew of the initiative and only 34% believe he has the capacity to convince Donald Trump to back down. For 58%, this power does not exist. The proximity to the US president, which could be presented as a diplomatic asset, risks being interpreted as political dependence without practical results. The electoral effect appears in the specific question about whose vote the tariff hike brings closer to. Lula reaches 42%, Flávio 27%, another candidate 23%, and 8% don't know how to answer. The 15-point advantage should not be confused with a traditional voting intention, because the question is conditioned on the issue of tariffs. Even so, it reveals who wins and who loses within this debate. The ideological breakdown suggests an important consequence. Among independents, Lula grows and widens his lead; among non-Bolsonaro right-wing voters, Flávio's decline primarily benefits the "other candidate" alternative, not the president. This means that the erosion of Bolsonarism could open space for both Lula and a third conservative candidacy. The image of the United States also deteriorates: 48% have an unfavorable opinion, 34% favorable, and 18% don't know how to answer. The greater the rejection of the country, the greater the electoral cost of an excessively personalistic alignment with Trump. The poll does not prove a definitive change in the election, but it identifies a favorable window for Lula. The tariff hike reinforces the discourse of sovereignty, amplifies the perception of economic threat, and weakens Flávio precisely in the area where he intended to demonstrate international influence. If the issue continues to be associated with concrete losses, it could transcend the diplomatic context and become a lasting component of the presidential race. #GenialQuaestResearch #ElectoralPoll2026 #Lula #FlávioBolsonaro #TariffHit #DonaldTrump #Elections2026 #ElectoralAnalysis #BrazilianPolitics #NationalSovereignty