ANTICIPATING public trends is a tricky and dangerous business, especially when you are in politics. Get it right and you are taken for granted; get it wrong and you are dead meat. Elections are unforgiving things, with no second chances.
That is why the job of hunting the floating vote is so fascinating. Backroom staff in the main political parties have been working on their general election strategies for months, and the nature of the package, is now emerging.
The big red ribbon on the election box, designed to appeal to the public, will bear the slogan "Family Values".
It is a nice, comfortable idea. It promises the traditional certainties of the past plus the economic benefits of the present. And it appeals with particular force to the conservative streak in all of us.
John Major tried out a version of this (American) idea less than two years ago with his "Back to Basics" policy. It went well until the British tabloid papers started muck raking.
Their explorations in the seedy undergrowth of life caused a sizeable number of Tory Ministers and MPs to fall out of the closet and to humiliate their leader. The "Back to Basics" policy has been officially forgotten.
Here at home, a great deal of work has gone into analysing voting patterns and their underlying motivations. In his recent book, Irish Voters Decide, Richard Synnott advanced the proposition that the electorate is divided into three equal segments composed of conservatives, liberals and floating voters. And he used the results of various referendums, up to 1992, to support his argument.
Long before the book appeared, however, members of the Catholic Hierarchy had complained that the mainstream political parties had been hijacked by supporters of the liberal agenda. No party in the Dail, the bishops said, truly reflected the Catholic ethos.
It was a criticism which encouraged people such as Nora Bennis to establish alternative political groupings. Des Hanafin pointed to the success of farming groups and argued passionately that their objectives could best be served through effective political lobbying. But change was coming.
FIANNA Fail, in opposition, read the signs and began to trim its sails. Last February Bertie Ahern nodded in the direction of these organisations by allowing his parliamentary party to oppose the Government Bill providing for freedom of information on abortion.
While he himself, and key members of his front bench, later held the line on divorce, wavering deputies and members of the party organisation were allowed to go their owns way.
It wasn't enough for the anti divorce campaigners. They demanded a repeat of the "neutral but opposed" stance which had helped to defeat the referendum in 1986, and were denied. As a result, they say, "terrible damage" was done to the Fianna Fail party in the country.
The last opinion polls before the November referendum showed a majority of Fianna Fail voters intending to vote No. Fine Gael supporters were almost equally divided. And there was an unequivocal urban/rural split.
It was a critical situation for the two main parties: not as bad as losing the referendum, but near enough. And alternative political parties were waiting in the wings to gobble up disillusioned Fianna Fail and Fine Gael voters.
Des Hanafin's challenge to the outcome of the divorce referendum in the High Court has provided a breathing space. But the big parties are already up and running.
Fianna Fail is "appalled" at the way the Government handled the November advertising campaign. And Mr Ahern, desperately vulnerable because of his personal situation, insists he never attempted to force pro divorce views down anybody's throat.
John Bruton, with the referendum behind him, has set out his stall as the purveyor of family values.
Damage limitation was under way even before the result of the referendum became known. In early November, when the amendment appeared to be heading for defeat, Fine Gael, the Labour Party and Democratic Left agreed to the establishment of a Commission on the Family.
And Proinsias De Rossa said it would "develop our thinking and our approach to help and strengthen families at a time of immense structural change."
It was the caring face of an insecure Government. And its was designed to deflect the complaints of those committed to traditional social and moral values. Even so, there were differences of emphasis within Government.
WHILE not criticising the traditional (married husband and wife) family model, Mr De Rossa said they must no longer structure official policies as if that was the only form a family could assume. And he declared that many Irish people had chosen other models which were equally valid.
It was clear, during President Clinton's visit, that Finola Bruton, at least, did not subscribe to that view.
She declared "a loving married relationship between a man and a woman is a core value to be recognised, affirmed and supported." And she maintained "true radicalism is about asking questions about those ideas that are most fashionable, most progressive or most politically correct at any given time in history."
But the three Coalition leaders were agreed that, no matter what form the family might take in the aftermath of divorce, resources would have to be found to counter the deprivation of children and to provide opportunities for growth and development.
Over the past weeks, John Bruton, Dick Spring and Proinsias De Rossa have sketched out a Budget package to enhance family welfare and provide jobs targeted at the unemployed.
Fine Gael is clearly addressing that 49 per cent plus of voters who rejected constitutional change. And if there was any residual doubt about where the party now stands on family matters, this week's much publicised audience of Mr and Mrs Bruton with the Pope will have sorted it out.
This love bombing of the family has stolen an economic march on Fianna Fail and the Progressive Democrats. But it is only a matter of time before they move to close the gap with the Government parties and meet the threat posed by those fringe parties which campaigned against the abortion and divorce amendments.
Nora Bennis and her, National Party are talking about a countrywide structure to take on the Dail parties. Muintir na hEireann and, Richard Green are making similar noises. And other groups are awaiting the out come of the referendum case being fought by Des Hanafin in the High Court.
The anti divorce lobby has the makings of a potent force. For, even if it fails to organise a coherent, state wide political structure before the next general election, independent candidates will have the capacity to win seats.
In that regard, Fianna Fail needs no reminding of the effect H Block candidates had on their government formation prospects in 1981.
Before that happens, there will be two by elections in early summer to test the political waters. Such contests normally reflect local issues, but the anti divorce turnout was so strong in Donegal North East that the fringe parties may be tempted to field a candidate there.
If that happens, the issue of family values will move to centre stage. And we will have a much clearer idea of its potency in hooking that enormous vote.