The article elaborates on the stark contrasts between the electoral processes of the United States and Brazil, emphasizing the decentralized nature of the U.S. system. Unlike Brazil, which has a national authority overseeing electoral administration, the U.S. relies heavily on state and local jurisdictions to manage their elections, making it one of the most decentralized electoral systems in the world. This arrangement aims to minimize the risks of centralized control, thereby preventing a sitting president from manipulating the election process.

In terms of the electoral framework, the article points out the majority rule utilized in the U.S., with much shorter terms for elected officials. Members of the House of Representatives serve two-year terms, while Senators serve four years, which leads to the occurrence of midterm elections halfway through a presidential term. These midterm elections are significant as they serve as a barometer for the current administration's approval and can shift the balance of power in Congress.

The discussion provides insights into the implications of this decentralized approach to elections in the U.S., particularly regarding security and the influence of state-level politics. Critics argue that the absence of a centralized authority can lead to inconsistencies and potential vulnerabilities in the electoral system, raising questions about the integrity and fairness of elections during politically charged periods, such as midterms or presidential elections.