The two-point victory of progressive Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva over neofascist incumbent Jair Bolsonaro prompts comparisons with the containment of neofascism in the U.S. But let’s draw the right lessons.

One is that Lula had an immense stock of goodwill to draw on from Brazil’s working people because of the stunning program of practical, easy-to-grasp help that he delivered during his two terms of office between 2003 and 2010. His program included the famous Bolsa Família, which gave cash grants to poor families as long as their kids attended school and got vaccinated. It was the world’s largest direct cash program and thanks to the Bolsa, Brazilian poverty under Lula dropped by 27 percent. Lula also worked closely with Brazil’s unions so that gains went to the middle class as well as the poor, and he began reversing deforestation in the Amazon.

The Wall Street Journal quotes a lab technician, Germano Silva, recalling how under Lula’s presidency he could afford to travel by airplane for the first time instead of taking a long bus ride. He put three children through college, thanks to a new government scholarship program enacted under Lula. "My vote is one of gratitude," he said.

Until Biden managed to get a one-year universal basic income for parents, Democrats delivered nothing remotely close over the past three Democratic presidencies. They are now having to rebuild credibility with cynical working-class voters, starting about 40 points down.

Lula, by contrast, delivered the kind of unapologetic help to ordinary Brazilian people that a Bernie Sanders or an Elizabeth Warren might have delivered. On Sunday, the people reciprocated.

The second lesson, sadly, is that Brazil’s democratic institutions are better bolstered than ours. Lula has been certified as the winner in a direct popular vote, and there is no counterpart to the Electoral College or the formal certification by the U.S. House to invite mischief.

Even so, Lula does not take office until January 1, and there has been conjecture that Bolsonaro will find ways to overturn the election. However, unlike in the U.S. in Bush v. Gore, the courts would oppose that. And the military, which supported coups in the 20th century as recently as 1964, leading to a brutal 21-year dictatorship, is no fan of Bolsonaro.

A New York Times piece in August quoted an interview with Luís Roberto Barroso, a Supreme Court justice and Brazil’s former elections chief, about the last successful coup in Brazil, in 1964: "The middle class supported it. Business people supported it. The press supported it. And the U.S. supported it. Well, none of these players support a coup now." Also in August, more than a million Brazilians, including former presidents, leading academics, lawyers, and pop stars, signed a letter defending the country’s voting systems. Business leaders released a similar letter.

Another instructive comparison is the role of corruption in both countries. In the U.S., working-class MAGA voters look past Trump’s gross corruption because in the absence of much practical economic help from Democrats, they are convinced that Trump is on their side culturally. In Brazil, Lula served time for an alleged corruption scandal, a conviction that was eventually overturned. This history didn’t bother a majority of Brazilian voters, who have proof positive that Lula is on your side.

One further comparison is the role of economic elites. In Brazil, the business class backed the 1964 coup and many corporate and financial leaders backed Bolsonaro in 2018 to end the long-dominant role of Lula’s Brazilian Workers’ Party. This time, Bolsonaro’s personal instability and failed policies, including Brazil’s COVID disaster, gave just enough corporate leaders pause. In the U.S., corporate elites don’t much like Trump, but they back Republicans down the line.

Democrats have a lot to learn from Lula.