Electoral funds and TV time become central assets in the dispute for power in 2026

The 2026 election begins long before the official request for votes. With rules that concentrate financial resources and advertising time in the hands of party leadership, the fight for electoral funds and TV space is consolidated as one of the main power factors in the presidential race and in next year’s state elections.

Today, the distribution of these assets is defined based on the size of the benches in Congress and the performance of the parties in previous elections. In practice, larger parties enter the campaign with a structural advantage, while medium and small parties start to use political support and alliances as currency to compensate for the smaller share of resources.

Electoral fund at the center of power

The electoral fund has become one of the main instruments of control within parties. The legislation gives national boards broad autonomy to decide how the money will be distributed among candidates, states and positions in dispute. This reinforces the power of party leaders and transforms access to resources into a central element of political loyalty.

In practice, the majority of the fund tends to be directed to candidacies considered strategic, either to strengthen national projects or to preserve seats in Congress. Competitive candidates who do not have internal support end up facing difficulties in running robust campaigns, even when they appear well positioned in polls.

In 2026, this mechanism gains even more weight given the large number of open successions in state governments and the direct impact that these disputes will have on the formation of federal benches from 2027 onwards.

Concentration of resources

The current model reinforces a recurring pattern in the Brazilian political system: parties with greater representation continue to accumulate the majority of available resources. The consequence is the expansion of inequality between campaigns and the reduction of space for candidacies outside traditional structures.

Even in a scenario of increasing use of social networks, money continues to be decisive in financing teams, content production, travel and territorial presence.

Without access to the fund, campaigns become more dependent on party support or low-range strategies, which limits competitiveness.

TV time as currency

Despite the loss of prominence on digital platforms, radio and television time continues to be a relevant asset, especially in political negotiations. More than a direct instrument for convincing voters, it works as a bargaining chip in the formation of alliances.

Parties with little electoral importance, but with important seconds of propaganda, gain weight in articulations for majority tickets.

In 2026, this dynamic tends to be repeated both in the presidential election and in disputes for state governments, influencing the composition of coalitions and the choice of vice candidates.

Alliances guided by calculation, not affinity

The result of this system is a campaign shaped by pragmatism. The rules encourage broad alliances, often without programmatic coherence, based on the sum of financial resources and exposure time.

The institutional design ends up favoring party machines and reducing the space for more independent candidates or candidates with an outsider profile.

With a fragmented Congress and a polarized political environment, the tendency is for this type of arrangement to gain even more strength in 2026, both at the national level and in the states.

State and presidential races

In state elections, the influence of the rules is even more visible. Government candidates depend on the approval of national leadership to guarantee access to funds and TV time, which increases the interference of party leaders in local disputes.

In the presidential election, the logic is similar: the viability of candidacies depends, to a large extent, on the ability to form alliances that guarantee financial structure and exposure.

Even when large volumes of resources do not automatically convert into votes, they continue to determine who can mount competitive campaigns and occupy relevant space in the public debate.

The election before the campaign

With the current rules, a significant part of the 2026 dispute will be decided away from the voter. The definition of internal priorities, the division of the electoral fund and the negotiation of advertising time take place months before the official start of the campaign.

When election time begins, much of the game will already be underway. For voters, the dispute manifests itself on TV and social media. Behind the scenes, however, the result begins to be shaped much earlier, in the silent dispute for money, time and power within the parties.