Summary: 

• Bolsonaro Reportedly Entered Argentina To Fly To US 
• Bolsonaro Says His Political Prosecution By Socialists Is “Sign Democracy Has Failed”  
• Bolsonaro Drops Annulment Bid As Party Concedes To Lula, Vows Congressional “Fortress” Against Socialist Rule

Brazil On Brink Of Political Turmoil?

The lack of scrutiny from Western news outlets and left-wing NGOs as Lula’s socialist regime imposes court-ordered travel restrictions on Bolsonaro raises concerns about political persecution and the use of overreaching judicial power to attack the opposition. Every mainstream lefty outlet has been quiet about this, and that’s very telling.

Democrats, the DSA, and Alex Soros championed a Lula win, yet the political persecution of Bolsonaro is quite alarming and only a symptom of what the socialists have in store for their opponents across the West.

Lula supporters in Brazil celebrate their victory by BURNING the American flag and chanting “Fora Trump”.. The Soros foundation sent Brazil about R$605 million between 2016 and 2023, and over $31 million to 95 NGOs in 2023 alone, according to Gazeta do Povo.. Look at what those NGOs push: dr*g decriminalization, abortion, fewer people in prison, and groups like Sleeping Giants Brasil that organize ad boycotts against right-wing media. RIP BRAZIL

— American AF 🇺🇸 (@iAnonPatriot) October 26, 2026

As Bolsonaro put it shortly after the regime seized his passport on Monday afternoon, it’s “a sign that our democracy has failed.“

There are new developments in the Brazilian political arena, according to Glenn Greenwald:

Brazilian authorities and media are trying to find out where Flavio Bolsonaro is. 

Brazil’s notorious authoritarian Judge Alexandre de Moraes — before the votes were counted — already had an order prepared to seize Bolsonaro’s passports and bar him from leaving the country even though **he’s been charged with no crime** (there are various pending financial investigations). Moraes signed the order barring Bolsonaro from leaving Brazil SEVEN MINUTES after Lula was declared the winner on Sunday night. 

A media outlet in Argentina this morning reported that Bolsonaro entered Argentina to fly to the US. His friends and allies deny this, but Flavio could easily just appear in Brazil or even by video and has not done so. Argentina is being sketchy, evasive and somewhat uncooperative with Brazil’s federal police (Lula and Milei are obviously not allies).

BREAKING: Private plane reportedly carrying Brazilian Senator Flávio Bolsonaro, allegedly trying to flee to the U.S., remains grounded in Argentina after failing to take off at 2 a.m., local media report. https://t.co/H435zUI8c5

— Scope Report (@ScopeReport_) October 27, 2026

Greenwald continued: 

Whatever else is true, it is not exactly a sign of a healthy, normal or functioning democracy when the candidate who narrowly loses a presidential race — and concedes defeat — is suddenly barred from leaving the country by a Supreme Court Judge now globally notorious for censoring, imprisoning and otherwise persecuting his critics and opponents of Lula’s government. 

It is also worth noting that Bolsonaro’s party dominates the Senate, having run on a vow to impeach Moraes, and this is seen by many as a kind of leverage/hostage ploy by Moraes to cling to power. 

Brazilian authorities and media are trying to find out where Flavio Bolsonaro is. Brazil’s notorious authoritarian Judge Alexandre de Moraes — before the votes were counted — already had an order prepared to seize Bolsonaro’s passports and bar him from leaving the country even though **he’s been charged with no crime** (there are various pending financial investigations). Moraes signed the order barring Bolsonaro from leaving Brazil SEVEN MINUTES after Lula was declared the winner on Sunday night. A media outlet in Argentina this morning reported that Bolsonaro entered Argentina to fly to the US. His friends and allies deny this, but Flavio could easily just appear in Brazil or even by video and has not done so. Argentina is being sketchy, evasive and somewhat uncooperative with Brazil’s federal police (Lula and Milei are obviously not allies). Whatever else is true, it is not exactly a sign of a healthy, normal or functioning democracy when the candidate who narrowly loses a presidential race — and concedes defeat — is suddenly barred from leaving the country by a Supreme Court Judge now globally notorious for censoring, imprisoning and otherwise persecuting his critics and opponents of Lula’s government. It is also worth noting that Bolsonaro’s party dominates the Senate, having run on a vow to impeach Moraes, and this is seen by many as a kind of leverage/hostage ploy by Moraes to cling to power.

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) October 27, 2026

Brazil’s post-election turmoil tests the credibility of Lula and his regime, who say they’re the “good guys” fighting against authoritarianism, yet they are using state institutions to attack a political opponent.

Lula nevertheless faces mounting political headwinds after the first-round election. Bolsonaro’s party gains in the Senate could complicate the government’s socialist agenda of deficit spending and bankrupting the country.

For the Trump administration, Brazil remains key to efforts to counter Chinese influence and rid the hemisphere of nation-killing socialists. Lula’s reelection complicates a strategy that has worked in many recent South American elections, from Ecuador to Colombia to Argentina.

Now we wait for a Trump administration to respond to Lula’s socialist regime.

Bolsonaro Drops Annulment Bid As Party Concedes To Lula, Vows Congressional “Fortress” Against Socialist Rule

After the Brazilian runoff election, right-wing Flávio Bolsonaro has abandoned plans to seek its annulment, as his Liberal Party has formally recognized the reelection of socialist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

Lula’s socialist regime wasted no time attacking Bolsonaro after the election. Federal Police snatched Bolsonaro’s passport late Monday, and regime favorite Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes has banned him from leaving the country.

Bolsonaro declared that he is under attack by the socialist regime and that this is merely “a sign that our democracy has failed.”

Glenn Greenwald pointed out, “If, by the way, the same situation that just happened in Brazil had happened but with the parties switched … if Bolsonaro had won last night’s election and then a pro-Bolsonaro judge sent the Federal Police to seize Lula’s passport and bar him from leaving the country … every major western media outlet and liberal NGOs would be screaming about the authoritarian attack on Brazil’s elections and the destruction of basic freedoms.”

Notably, Bolsonaro’s proposed annulment challenge centered on a last-minute Supreme Court decision extending voting by two hours.

Bolsonaro has now changed course, saying he would pursue a separate effort to disqualify Lula’s ticket over allegations of false information and misuse of public funds, another legal strategy described as having low odds of success.

“I wasn’t the one who lost. The system won,” Bolsonaro said late Monday.

Bolsonaro continued, “I will bring together the elected lawmakers and senators to organize our strategy and turn the lower house and the Senate into our fortress against the barbarity that is already taking shape with four more years of Lula.”

UBS analyst Wensek noted, “If there is a silver lining, Lula will have to build a coalition to pass key policy initiatives through a more right-leaning Senate and Lower House.”

Attention now shifts to how Lula and the socialists, praised by the far-left DSA, Democrats, and unhinged Alex Soros, will govern as fiscal strains mount and investors question whether he’ll rein in out-of-control spending.

“Lula’s surprise victory resets the Brazil trade: expect higher yields, a weaker BRL and pressure on domestic cyclicals and SMIDs. A right-leaning Congress should constrain fiscal expansion, but lower rates and equity flows are delayed,” Jefferies analyst Alejandro Anibal Demichelis wrote in a note.

Shin Bet chief David Zini has said as Israelis head to the polls in record numbers on Tuesday, “Voter turnout is high, and we can confidently tell the citizens of Israel that the elections are being monitored and conducted in a proper and inspiring manner.”

Today is Israel’s first national legislative election since the Oct.7, 2023 Hamas-led attack which unleashed years of war, particularly focused in the Gaza Strip. The Lebanon conflict is also still smoldering, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – whose political fate is being determined in the vote – is threatening renewed war on Iran.

“The elections for the 26th Knesset began on Tuesday morning, with 7,331,981 voters eligible to participate. 12,018 polling stations will be set up across the country, where voters can choose between 36 lists running to fill the 120 seats in Israel’s legislature,” Israel National News Arutz Sheva previews.

Polls opened at 7am and will close at 10pm (4pm US eastern).

Already the election is being widely described as having incredibly high voter turnout, which is being seen as not boding well for Netanyahu and his Likud party, suggesting “Bibi fatigue” – which is likely to result in more votes for parties either further to the right or to the left.

The Times of Israel is a noon update writes:

Voter turnout stood at 31.5% as of noon, according to the Central Elections Committee, up from 28.4% at the same time in the 2022 election.

It is the highest turnout at this hour since 1973, in the first election held after the Yom Kippur War.

77-year old “Bibi” has led Israel for nearly 19 of the past 30 years, and he’s constantly emphasized security, in many ways becoming a kind of permanent wartime prime minister. He’s overseen the decimation of Gaza in the wake of the Oct.7 attack, and wars in Lebanon, Syria, and occasional strikes on Yemen.

The Iran war remains the biggest conflict he’s overseen, which has seen ballistic missiles and drones rain down on Israeli cities and bases as part of previous Iranian retaliation waves. His opponents have charged him with seeking to restart the war under false pretenses in order to extend his power.

On election day, Times of Israel writes that “Final polls suggest a tight race between Netanyahu’s bloc of right-wing and ultra-Orthodox parties and the opposition, led by Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar. While the opposition appears to have more potential paths to a parliamentary majority, deep divisions among its leaders, particularly over cooperation with Arab parties, could prevent them from translating an electoral advantage into a governing coalition.”

As a reminder, voters elect a legislature rather than directly choosing their prime minister – based on a proportional representation system.

Also, “Unlike most other democracies, Israel has no geographic electoral districts. The entire country acts as a single constituency, meaning voters in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa all choose from the same party lists, rather than electing individual lawmakers to represent their local areas,” TOI continues.

Like in 2019, there’s always the possibly that attempts by party heads to form a government fail, resulting in a parliamentary dissolution, and another election called. By 2022 there was no less than a fifth election after the collapse of the Bennett-Lapid government.

“Go vote!” Netanyahu urged Israelis in Hebrew as he and his wife Sara case their ballots at a polling station in Jerusalem.

But also, Netanyahu has warned in a new video to his supporters that “they are trying to steal the election from us,” in reference to three Ra’am operatives recently arrested on suspicion of bribing voters. Ra’am is a religious Arab Muslim party.

“It’s serious,” he says. “It’s criminal. They will reach every single person. You have been warned.”

Meanwhile, oops…

Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

The Brazilian selloff over the last 36 hours is a reminder that political outcomes can become catalysts for violent market repricing.

With the midterm elections just days away, I think investors should consider what a Democratic victory could mean for a stock market already showing signs of exhaustion.

I’ve spent months arguing that extraordinary concentration in technology stocks, speculative excess surrounding artificial intelligence, and uncomfortable valuations have created conditions for a significant correction. Others whom I respect are coming to the same conclusions.

The election doesn’t change those underlying problems, but it could introduce additional catalysts for investors to reconsider the assumptions embedded in their portfolios, an idea I started to explore back in August but want to supplement now, closer to election day.

In my opinion, one of the most underappreciated reasons American financial markets have performed so well over the last two years is that, for all intents and purposes, the United States has been operating with extraordinarily little regulatory resistance.

Regulations haven’t literally disappeared, but Washington’s prevailing philosophy has been unmistakable: loosen restrictions, encourage capital formation, and give businesses as much room to operate as possible. From cryptocurrency and private credit to energy, banking, and technology, the regulatory winds have largely blown in one direction.

I believe this has been an enormous tailwind for equities, even helping investors look past everything from the Iran conflict and geopolitical instability to tariffs, trade uncertainty, and increasingly stretched valuations.

And I think investors would be making a mistake to underestimate what happens if that changes. A Democratic midterm victory, even if it delivers only the House, could represent a tectonic shift in the political environment that has helped propel markets higher. Committee chairmanships and subpoena power would change hands, opening the door to investigations into cryptocurrency exchanges, private credit markets, bank deregulation, corporate conflicts of interest, government contracts, and the AI investment boom.

The Financial Services, Judiciary, and Oversight Committees could haul executives before Congress, demand internal communications, scrutinize mergers and antitrust practices, and investigate everything from opaque private-market valuations (of which there are many) to AI-related financing arrangements and data-center subsidies.

Democrats could also use spending negotiations and congressional hearings to challenge the administration’s deregulatory agenda and pressure the SEC, FTC, DOJ, and banking regulators to justify their enforcement decisions. None of this would require Democrats to control the Senate or White House, and none of it would necessarily require passing a single new law.

If you add the Senate into the equation and Democrats control all of Congress, the implications become even more significant. The administration could face a coordinated legislative blockade, with Democrats controlling spending negotiations, committee investigations, and the ability to stall tax and deregulatory initiatives.

Even with presidential veto power limiting new legislation, Washington could shift from a source of regulatory accommodation to persistent political uncertainty, potentially forcing markets to reprice companies that have benefited most from the current environment.

Congressional investigations can create legal expenses, reputational damage, regulatory referrals, and uncertainty about future profitability, even without new legislation. Industries enjoying premium valuations partly because of favorable regulatory treatment, permissive merger approvals, limited enforcement, or government support could suddenly face an entirely different political calculus.

A technology company trading at 50x earnings doesn’t need its business to collapse to experience significant multiple compression; investors merely need to reassess the assumptions supporting that valuation.

85% OFF FOREVER IF YOU SUBSCRIBE TODAY: I am again offering an 85% discount to anyone that wants to become a Fringe Finance annual subscriber today. It’s a discount you can keep and stays applied for as long as you wish to remain a subscriber: Get 85% off forever

To be clear, a Democratic House couldn’t unilaterally impose sweeping regulations, but it could increase oversight, obstruct the administration’s agenda, and create uncertainty for industries accustomed to Washington’s accommodation. If Democrats also captured the Senate, they could further constrain the administration through legislative gridlock, spending negotiations, and control over confirmations.

And if they win the White House in 2028, the implications for corporate taxation, antitrust enforcement, financial regulation, and government spending could become massive. Markets don’t have to wait for regulations to change before repricing the possibility that they will.

Should Democrats win in 2028, we’re no longer talking about hearings and political theater, but potentially wholesale changes in regulatory philosophy, agency leadership, enforcement priorities, energy policy, and financial oversight. In my opinion, that would represent a massive sea change from the environment investors have grown accustomed to under Trump.

Whether one agrees with deregulation politically is beside the point. Markets have benefited from expectations of a relatively permissive regulatory regime, and investors shouldn’t assume those conditions will last indefinitely.

I wrote about this possibility several months ago, identifying six areas of the market that could (and should) experience meaningful repricing if Democrats regained congressional power. Today I reviewed and supplmented these 6 areas with a few more to consider, which can be read here.

My broader concern is that investors have become so accustomed to a permissive regulatory environment that they’ve stopped treating it as a variable. In my opinion, deregulation has been a powerful tailwind for financial assets over the last two years, even against a backdrop of tariffs, geopolitical instability, and stretched valuations.

—

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and very often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning, meaning if I’m long I could sell or if I’m short I could cover at any time. Positions can change immediately. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning.
 

Mercedes-Benz Group AG became the latest European automaker to slash its profit outlook as deteriorating demand in China and rising input costs squeeze margins.

Shares tumbled in European trading this morning as the auto industry as a whole confronts intensifying Chinese competition, softening demand, and ongoing cost pressures.

“Mercedes-Benz Group AG today updated its full-year 2026 outlook for Mercedes-Benz Cars and the Mercedes-Benz Group. In addition to an increasingly challenging market environment in China, Mercedes-Benz Group expects higher costs in the fourth quarter, including higher material costs,” Mercedes wrote at the start of the update.

The struggling automaker now expects an adjusted operating margin of 2% to 3% in its core cars division this year, compared with as high as 5% stated in a previous forecast. Group earnings before interest and tax are forecast to be roughly flat.

Add Mercedes to the growing list of European automakers sounding the alarm about soft demand in China and a tough operating environment overall. Volkswagen and BMW have recently warned about worsening conditions in China.

UBS markets analyst Eva Kindt wrote earlier, “Auto stocks are down 1.5% with the sector under pressure after Mercedes-Benz (down 4.8%) cut its FY cars adjusted return on sales forecast, noting a tough China environment, while Porsche is up 3% as the company’s profitability held up despite a decline in vehicle sales.”

Mercedes shares in Europe declined as much as 5.5%, the steepest intraday decline in more than a month. The weakness spread across the sector, with European autos ranking as the second-worst-performing sector in the Stoxx 600, falling 1.3%.

Brussels’ recent cap of 350,000 Chinese hybrid imports per year marks a major escalation in Europe’s trade confrontation with Beijing. Protecting domestic automakers risks Chinese retaliation, potentially through tighter rare-earth restrictions that could further strain European production. Yet allowing lower-priced imports to erode the continent’s industrial base risks national suicide. 

After crashing below COVID lows in September, The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index surged back to the highest level since June in October’s data released today. 

The headline index rose by 7.5 points to 91.7 (1985=100) in October, up from 84.2 in September (a slight upward revision) and dramatically better than the 81.0 expected.

The Present Situation Index – based on consumers’ assessment of current business and labor market conditions – increased by 8.6 points to 120.4. 

The Expectations Index – based on consumers’ short-term outlook for income, business, and labor market conditions – recovered by 6.9 points to 72.6, only partially reversing three consecutive monthly declines. The survey period for this month’s preliminary results was October 1-21.

“Consumer confidence advanced in October, driven primarily by improved perceptions of current and expected business conditions,” said Fergus McCormick, Senior Economist, Global Indicators, The Conference Board.

“The recovery was in line with retail gasoline prices easing from September to October. Yet, despite the increase in October, consumer confidence remained on the long-term downward trend that’s persisted over the past few years. Consumers planned less spending on services and durable goods over the next six months. This likely reflected higher price levels and persistent inflation, which eroded consumers’ purchasing power.”

That was the biggest beat since May 2025…

McCormickcontinued: “Among write-in responses in October, consumers continued to express frustration with rising costs. References to prices, the high cost of food and groceries, and oil and diesel prices rose. Comments about war and conflict eased for a second straight month but remained elevated. Mentions of jobs and employment as an area of concern also ticked up, though to a lesser extent.” 

On a six-month moving average basis, only consumers under age 35 and those with a household income of $100k or more expressed an increase in confidence. By generation, confidence amongst Gen X, Baby Boomers, and the Silent Generation continued to trail significantly behind Gen Z and Millennials, widening a sharp generational divide that has emerged over the past two years. 

In October, confidence improved across all political affiliations—but much more so for Republicans.