There can be little doubt who will succeed Mrs Mary Robinson as the next President of Ireland. There is a consistency in the polls in these final days of the campaign which shows Prof Mary McAleese racing ahead of her nearest rival, Ms Mary Banotti. All that now seems to be at issue is whether the contest will go beyond a second count. Prof McAleese's campaign, and her showing in the polls, represent a significant achievement for the candidate herself and for Fianna Fail which chose her to contest the Presidency instead of Mr Albert Reynolds. It is clear that her appeal has been to a wider constituency than Fianna Fail's core support and it seems likely that she has struck a chord across the age groups. Attempts to tag her as a Sinn Fein supporter have, if anything, yielded her a sympathy bonus. Mary McAleese reflects some things that this newspaper would consider problematic. She has a certain unhappy ability to evoke sentiments which are at best divisive. She is no Provo fellow-traveller, but for many she represents a one-dimensional nationalism which most thinking people in this State have been happy to put behind them. And her public stance on certain confessional issues is redolent of a conservatism which has also largely passed out of public life here. If she finds herself in Aras an Uachtarain she will have to consider carefully how best to present herself as a President who is a unifying rather than a dividing influence.
For all that, she is a remarkable and rather unique woman. She refused to be pigeon-holed from the beginning of the campaign, and an examination of her record confirms a character which is complex, thoughtfuln and individualistic. She is for gay rights, but against abortion. She has a progressive record on penal reform yet she is opposed to integrated education. She is personally opposed to divorce yet her presentation to the New Ireland Forum in 1984 was a model of liberal argument. Over and above all this, she is clearly a woman of sharp intellect, formidable energy and forceful personality. Her seven years could be an unpredictable, volatile but also, perhaps, a stimulating span.
There are four other excellent candidates. But Prof McAleese's only serious rival at this point is Fine Gael's Ms Mary Banotti. Ms Banotti has put in a highly creditable performance and she has created a real choice for voters. She is an experienced parliamentarian with a praiseworthy record of concern and activism which has been sharpened by her own life experiences. A Banotti presidency would not carry the risk element which would attach to Prof McAleese and there is a strong argument for supporting a candidacy which is solid and stable in its style, and pluralist, generous and liberal in its substance. Voters who are old enough to remember the struggles for freedom of expression, for a woman's right to control her own fertility, for the separation of church and State, will feel instinctively supportive of Mary Banotti. Indeed, she has appealed to a great many Labour and Democratic Left supporters who see her - rather than Ms Adi Roche - as a President who would embody their principles and convictions.
But it is difficult to see how Ms Banotti can come forward at this point to overtake Prof McAleese. This is now a post-liberal society. The struggle to achieve inclusiveness and pluralism is history. It weighs not at all with many of the younger voters. Ms Banotti trails so far behind that even the most favourable distribution of second-preference votes could hardly bring her ahead. Her best hope must be to come in a respectable second having fought an honourable campaign. If she has a grievance it may be against her own party leadership for a couple of own-goals at the wrong time.