As the presidential election campaign enters its final hours, the prevailing emotion among many voters may be simple relief, with opinion polls revealing widespread dissatisfaction with the choice on offer.
It is true that the process has not produced an inspiring field. But that does not justify the claim made by supporters of some would-be candidates that it is somehow invalid. The framework has been in place for decades; if change is required, it should be achieved through political action.
Of the two active campaigns, Catherine Connolly’s – built around the broadest alliance of left-wing parties in the State’s history – has been disciplined, coherent and impressively managed. When she launched her bid in the middle of summer, describing it as a “movement”, the word seemed presumptuous. It now looks prescient.
Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, by contrast, have stumbled. Not all their misfortunes were self- inflicted. The late withdrawal of Fine Gael’s Mairead McGuinness for health reasons was a genuine blow. Replacing her with a long-serving minister with an Ulster Presbyterian background was a shrewd choice on paper, but Heather Humphreys has struggled to convey a convincing message beyond stiffly delivered soundbites.
READ MORE
Fianna Fáil’s surprise selection of Jim Gavin at the behest of party leader Micheál Martin proved to be a fiasco. His brief, halting foray into national politics was ignominiously cut short and his presence on Friday’s ballot only compounds the sense of farce surrounding the episode.
Together, these missteps reflect poorly on the Government parties. Their inability to project a coherent vision of the presidency mirrors their broader struggle to articulate a governing narrative less than a year into their current term.
Connolly’s campaign has filled that void, offering a values-based agenda touching on neutrality, social justice and the Irish language. Last week’s Irish Times/Ipsos B&A poll suggests voters prize integrity and independence of mind above policy or party loyalty. Connolly has tapped that mood with deft use of digital media that has energised young supporters in a way not seen since the marriage-equality and abortion referendums.
However, her record on international affairs reveals an intellectual rigidity rooted in an outdated view of geopolitics, and her barrister’s knack for dissimulation, deflection and bluster has been on frequent display. For a candidate who claims to answer every question, she has shown a marked reluctance to do so on issues of legitimate public concern. She appears to welcome scrutiny as long as it is other people being scrutinised.
Democracy often demands a choice between imperfect options. Many voters will feel that to be the case on Friday. But their decision will shape an important part of the national conversation for the next seven years.
