Flávio Bolsonaro won in 13 states and the Federal District, and Lula in 13; see the map

The second-round map shows two broad voting blocs. Lula won all nine Northeastern states, three Northern states, and Minas Gerais in the Southeast. Flávio Bolsonaro won the three Southern states, the three Center-West states, the Federal District, four Northern states, and three Southeastern states.

Lula’s winning states were Alagoas, Amapá, Amazonas, Bahia, Ceará, Maranhão, Minas Gerais, Pará, Paraíba, Pernambuco, Piauí, Rio Grande do Norte, and Sergipe. Flávio won Acre, Espírito Santo, Goiás, Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Paraná, Rio de Janeiro, Rio Grande do Sul, Rondônia, Roraima, Santa Catarina, São Paulo, and Tocantins, plus the Federal District.

These results show strong regional contrasts, but state totals did not decide the presidency. The national result came from adding valid votes across Brazil and abroad. Lula finished with 51.79%, while Flávio received 48.21% of valid votes.

The national count, completed with 100% of sections reported, gave Lula 64,256,232 valid votes. That represented 51.79% of the national valid vote. Flávio Bolsonaro received 59,826,041 votes, equal to 48.21%.

The key mechanism is that the presidency uses the combined valid vote from Brazil and abroad. It does not add up states as separate units. Each candidate’s percentage is calculated from the valid votes included in that nationwide total. Blank and null votes are left out of candidate percentages.

The final margin was 4,430,191 votes, based on the figures reported in the article. Lula therefore won the national contest despite Flávio leading in 13 states and the Federal District. The result demonstrates why the national vote total, rather than the geographic spread of victories, determines the winner.

Valid votes are the votes that express a choice for one of the candidates and therefore enter the candidate percentages. The article distinguishes them from blank and null votes. Only the valid votes from Brazil and abroad are used to calculate the presidential result.

For example, Lula’s 64,256,232 votes represented 51.79% of the valid national vote. Flávio Bolsonaro’s 59,826,041 votes represented 48.21%. Those percentages compare the candidates’ totals with the valid-vote total, not with every ballot cast.

This rule matters because blank and null votes do not support either candidate. Excluding them keeps the percentages focused on votes that selected a candidate. It also explains why the reported percentages add to 100% between Lula and Flávio, while the total number of ballots cast could include additional blank or null votes.

Winning more states does not automatically produce the presidency because states are not electoral units with fixed points in the national result. The presidency is defined by the sum of valid votes across Brazil and abroad. The candidate with the larger national total wins.

In this election, Flávio Bolsonaro led in 13 states and the Federal District. Lula led in 13 states. Even so, Lula received 64,256,232 valid votes, or 51.79%, while Flávio received 59,826,041, or 48.21%. A candidate can therefore win fewer geographic areas but accumulate more individual votes.

The pattern reflects differences in population and vote totals among states. The article does not assign equal value to each state’s victory. It reports one nationwide count, with blank and null votes excluded from candidate percentages. That is why the map and the final presidential result can point in different directions.

The clearest regional pattern was the Northeast’s complete support for Lula. He won all nine states in the region. He also carried three Northern states and Minas Gerais. Flávio Bolsonaro dominated the South and Center-West, winning every state in both regions and the Federal District.

The article gives striking examples of the strength of these blocs. Lula’s highest state percentage was 75.88% in Piauí, followed by 71.31% in Bahia. Flávio’s highest percentage nationwide was 72.46% in Roraima, in the North. The North was the most evenly divided by states, with four for Flávio and three for Lula.

The Southeast was also divided. Flávio won São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, and Espírito Santo, while Lula won Minas Gerais. These regional patterns reveal concentrated support, but the national result still depended on the total valid vote across every state and abroad.

Minas Gerais matters because it had the smallest difference between the candidates among all states and the Federal District. Lula received 50.43% of valid votes there, while Flávio Bolsonaro received 49.57%. The gap was only 0.86 percentage point.

This close result contrasts with much larger state-level margins elsewhere. Lula reached 75.88% in Piauí, while Flávio reached 72.46% in Roraima. Minas Gerais therefore provides the clearest example of a nearly even division of voter support. It also stood apart from the rest of the Southeast, where Flávio won São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, and Espírito Santo.

The result shows that regional labels can hide important local balance. Minas Gerais went to Lula, but only narrowly. The article does not say that the state determined the national election. It shows instead how small the local difference was within a nationwide contest decided by all valid votes combined.

In the second round, voters choose between the two presidential candidates. The result is then calculated nationally by adding each candidate’s valid votes from Brazil and abroad. The presidency is not awarded by counting how many states each candidate wins.

The article’s figures show the mechanism clearly. Lula won 13 states, while Flávio Bolsonaro won 13 states and the Federal District. Yet Lula’s national total reached 64,256,232 valid votes, compared with Flávio’s 59,826,041. Their national percentages were 51.79% and 48.21%, respectively.

This system makes every candidate’s vote part of one nationwide calculation. Regional maps remain useful for understanding where support is concentrated, but they do not replace the national count. Blank and null votes are excluded from candidate percentages. Thus, the second-round winner is the candidate with the larger combined valid vote total.