Dennis Prager on Brazil’s Election, Political Conflict and Audience Questions

Marissa Streit asks Dennis Prager what is on his mind during a week of elections in Brazil and Israel, followed by the US election. Prager begins with Brazil, where official results show Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva defeating Flávio Bolsonaro in the presidential runoff.

Prager says he doubts Lula won and points to Bolsonaro’s first-round lead and a judicial decision extending voting at some polling places. This is his allegation: the video does not establish that the election was fraudulent. Brazil’s electoral authorities announced Lula as the winner, and Bolsonaro’s party later acknowledged the official result.

Reading from a Wall Street Journal editorial, Prager discusses Brazil’s economic performance and criticizes the Workers’ Party. He treats economic dissatisfaction and the election outcome as reasons for his skepticism, while presenting his own broader argument against left-wing economic policy.

Prager focuses on the decision by Justice Cristiano Zanin to extend voting at polling stations that were still open, and questions its fairness. He says some machines could not be restarted. His conclusion that the result was corrupt is an assertion rather than proof of an altered vote count.

Turning to Israel’s election, Prager says the results are not yet known at the time of recording. He predicts that major policies toward Iran, Lebanon and Hamas would be similar regardless of the winner. That is his forecast, made before the election result.

He criticizes Israel’s coalition system and argues that opposition parties should be willing to join Benjamin Netanyahu, which he believes could reduce reliance on far-right and ultra-Orthodox parties. His assessment of the parties’ policy differences and motives is his own political analysis.

Streit says PragerU has many followers in Brazil, including families interested in homeschooling, and asks what he would tell listeners who feel discouraged after the election. She expresses their distrust of the political process; their belief that elections are being corrupted is not established by the discussion.

Prager responds with a lesson he draws from a biblical commentary: despair is a temptation to resist. He applies it both to his own condition after his accident and to political setbacks, urging listeners to remain engaged even when they cannot know how long change will take.

He says he hopes to return to international speaking and would like Brazil to be his first destination. Streit raises Bolsonaro’s departure from the country, and Prager speculates that he feared arrest. The discussion presents their interpretation of his departure rather than an established explanation of his motives.

Prager contrasts socialism and capitalism and argues that young Americans lack knowledge of the historical costs he associates with socialism. This is an ideological argument; the conversation does not examine the wide range of policies and historical outcomes covered by those terms.

Streit describes protests in Europe and interprets the presence of Palestinian flags as hostility toward Western countries. Prager agrees and makes sweeping claims about protesters’ motives. Those claims are their interpretation; people may participate in demonstrations for different reasons.

Prager rejects allegations of genocide in Gaza and cites population change in support of his position. The legal and factual question is contested; population change alone cannot resolve it. UN agencies have reported extensive deaths and humanitarian harm in Gaza, and international allegations are disputed by Israel.

Streit asks why wealthy individuals might fund unrest, mentioning George Soros as an allegation. Prager attributes ideological motives to wealthy supporters of left-wing causes. The conversation does not substantiate the claim that Soros funded the unrest discussed.

Prager recalls former communists who reconsidered their beliefs after learning about Stalin’s crimes. He argues, more broadly, that political commitments can persist despite contrary evidence. Streit says she finds the political views they are discussing difficult to understand.

Prager connects his political criticism to what he calls a defense of Judeo-Christian values. He rejects the concept of gender-affirming care and expresses opposition to transgender inclusion in girls’ sports. These are his views; the discussion does not provide a clinical assessment of gender-affirming care.

Before taking audience questions, Prager criticizes WNBA teams that left the court before the national anthem. Streit agrees and says she hopes hockey will remain free of the political conflict she associates with other sports.

A listener asks how to encourage an unambitious young adult. Prager attributes part of the problem to social media, praise without expectations and parents providing too much. He advises requiring the young person to earn support, illustrating his view with a story about the rare praise he received from his father.

He recalls receiving a brief compliment after a demanding bar mitzvah reading and contrasts that with what he sees as excessive praise today. His advice to the parent is to examine how much is given without expectations and to encourage responsibility.

Another listener asks whether to move away from family and friends to raise children in a more like-minded community. Prager emphasizes the influence of peers and suggests seeking a supportive community through faith, family or other groups. He also raises homeschooling as an option.

Asked where a young adult might find a future spouse, Prager suggests being honest and specific on dating profiles about deeply held values. In his view, shared principles matter more for a lasting match than a list of recreational preferences.

A student asks whether Andrew Jackson should be removed from the $20 bill. Prager calls Jackson a mixed figure but opposes most such removals, arguing that historical figures are inevitably flawed. Streit raises Jackson’s role in eliminating the national debt, and they acknowledge his treatment of Native Americans and the Trail of Tears.

Prager argues that educational resources should offer both knowledge and wisdom, and praises PragerU’s materials. Streit closes by thanking audience members for their questions and encouraging civic participation.