There are still 10 months to go until the 2024 municipal elections, but a recent survey by the Prefab Future Institute, carried out in the capital of Rio de Janeiro, could indicate a headache for the ticket to be supported by the governor of Rio de Janeiro, Cláudio Castro (PL). The current head of the state Executive has an unpopularity that has been growing since he began his second term.
According to Prefab Future Pesquisas, 59.8% of those interviewed in Rio de Janeiro, interviewed in person between the 16th and 18th of November, do not approve of Castro’s administration, compared to 24.2% who approve of the government and another 16% who do not. they knew how to evaluate.
Read also: Mercosur Social Summit begins this Monday (4) in Rio de Janeiro
The poll also shows a deterioration in the governor’s figure and management, since the beginning of the measurement, in March of this year, until now. In comparison, Castro’s positive evaluation has been declining: 40.3% approved in March, 25.9% in August and 24.2% approve of the administration now.
Regarding the negative ratings in the popularity of Cláudio Castro’s administration, 51.4% did not support it in March, 58.1% evaluated the government negatively in August and now it is 59.8%. Although there was no significant change in the negative rates, the governor lost support from those who supported him, going from 40.3% to 24.2%.
For political scientist Juliano Borges, PhD in Political Science from the Institute of Social and Political Studies at the State University of Rio de Janeiro (Iesp/Uerj), the former Iuperj, the research reflects a scenario exposed in the results of last year’s elections, when Castro was re-elected governor. Rio was the municipality where he had the narrowest margin of victory (49%) in the dispute with Marcelo Freixo (Psol).
“Cláudio Castro’s strength is in the interior, this is related to the alliances he made with the state’s city halls. His electoral approval is the result of the fact that he has shown himself to be quite skilled in building solid support from mayors in Baixada Fluminense, for example. And the resources from the sale of Cedae were used for his campaign through works that brought him closer to the population”, analyzes Borges.
The political scientist draws attention to the fact that Castro has never been a popular figure, unlike Mayor Eduardo Paes (PSD), who is known to the electorate and has popularity and engagement on social media.
“He was a councilman and the state government fell into his lap (Castro was vice-president of Wilson Witzel, from the PSC, governor who was removed due to impeachment proceedings in April 2021). It’s a meteoric career, which took a ride on Bolsonarism, with whom he later maintained a safe approach. He didn’t hug, but he didn’t deny it either”, assesses the researcher.
Eduardo Paes Factor
Recently, Cláudio Castro announced federal deputy Alexandre Ramagem (PL), former police chief and director general of the Brazilian Intelligence Agency (Abin) in the government of Jair Bolsonaro (PL), as his candidate for Mayor of Rio. According to O Globo newspaper columnist Lauro Jardim, Castro asked parties that have quotas in government departments to hand over their positions if they do not want to support Ramagem.
The strategy is an attempt to strangle current mayor Eduardo Paes’ candidacy for re-election. In the Prefab Future induced survey (when the pre-candidates are presented to interviewees), Paes is ahead of the others, with 35.2% of preference, followed by Tarcísio Motta (Psol), who has 6.3%; Ottoni (MDB), 4.8%; Marcelo Queiroz (PP), 4.5%; and Ramagem, with 2.7%.
Behind the scenes of alliance meetings that also involve negotiations with compensation in the election for the Mayor of São Paulo, both Queiroz and Ottoni may withdraw from the race in Rio. Ottoni has been approached to be vice-president of Ramagem, Cláudio Castro’s candidate.
Prefab Future Pesquisas interviewed 1,000 people in neighborhoods in Rio between November 16th and 18th, aged between 16 and 80 and eligible to vote. The maximum margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points for each percentage, considering a 95% confidence interval.
Source: BdF Rio de Janeiro
Editing: Mariana Pitasse