After weeks of intense debate between the two candidates, voting is just one day away in the Presidential Election.
Here are some of the key differences that have emerged during the campaign.
Government versus Opposition
A defining battleline has been the ideological divide between a Government candidate - an ex-minister - pitched against an Opposition politician.
With the departure of Fianna Fáil nominee Jim Gavin from active campaigning, Independent Catherine Connolly quickly summarised the contest as a simple choice between the Government and Opposition.
This has been underscored by the coalition of left-wing parties supporting her.
For her part, Heather Humphreys has drawn support from not just her Fine Gael colleagues, but also prominent Fianna Fáil politicians, including Taoiseach Micheál Martin, along with some of the Government- supporting Independent TDs.
In practice, the Fine Gael politician's vast government experience has been a double-edged sword.
She is the establishment candidate up against what has been pitched as a more insurgent grassroots campaign.
And Ms Humphreys has had to defend 14 years of Fine Gael government, including austerity budgets and failures in housing.
However, she has hit back at her opponent making it clear that she was prepared to take tough decisions.
She turned her ire on those who "sat on the sidelines opposing everything" praising Labour for "stepping up to the plate" adding that her opponent had accused that party of selling their souls.
In response, Ms Connolly took the opportunity to criticise Budget 2026 as having no disability payment or move to abolish the means test for the Carer's Allowance.
Europe and defence spending
Some of the most intense clashes of the campaign have been around attitudes to the European project and the move to greater military spending.
Ms Humphreys has repeatedly defined herself as pro-business and pro-Europe in comments that have been interpreted as an unsubtle dig at her rival.
But Ms Connolly has rejected this and insisted that she is pro-Europe.
She also faced criticism for comments she made early in the campaign likening the current German increase in defence spending to that country’s rearmament in the 1930s.
In response, Ms Connolly said: "I’m absolutely pro-European. Asking questions of the military industrial complex and the direction that the compass is going in Europe, it’s not the same as anti-European. I’m a committed European and a committed European asks questions."
However, in the same debate, Ms Humphreys countered: "You’ve managed to insult our allies. You’ve insulted Germany, you’ve insulted France, you’ve insulted the UK, our nearest neighbour, you’ve insulted the US.
"That doesn’t go without consequences. If you’re a president of this country, you have to meet other leaders and other heads of state, and how are you going to speak to them? How are you going to talk to them?"
Triple Lock
One of the clearest differences between the candidates is on the Triple Lock.
This is the mechanism that governs the sending of more than 12 Irish troops abroad for peacekeeping or peace enforcement operations.
The Triple Lock requires that these deployments have Government approval, the support of the Dáil and are mandated by the United Nations.
The Government has proposed that UN approval is removed because it argues that, in effect, this has meant that some members of the Security Council have blocked missions.
It says this has given Russia or China a veto on the deployment of Irish troops in a way that dilutes our sovereignty.
Ms Humphreys has espoused this position: "What I am saying is should we have to ask Russia or China, or the US, or any other country that is on the UN Security Council, do we have to get their permission so that we can send our peacekeeping forces on peacekeeping missions?"
However, Ms Connolly holds the view that removing the Triple Lock would compromise Irish neutrality - something the Government rejects.
She said: "The Triple Lock is at the core of our neutrality. Neutrality is one of the most important policies that we have.
"It should be used proactively so that we can bring peace as best we can in the world.
Occupied Territories Bill
The Occupied Territories Bill aims to ban trade between Ireland and Israel's illegal settlements on Palestinian land.
Ms Humphreys’ position on the bill appears to have evolved during the campaign.
In the first TV debate, she questioned the impact that passing such a law would have.
"Well, in fairness, is it going to make any difference in terms of what’s happening in Israel?," she asked.
Later, she appeared to have modified her position, although she initially would not be drawn on the key question of whether services would be included.
Her position now is that services should be included.
Ms Connolly has always been a proponent of the bill and strongly advocated for the inclusion of services.
In a recent interview she said: "I will continue to press for the Occupied Territories Bill to include services, as it was always intended," Connolly said, calling any limitation to goods an "appalling capitulation to corporate interests" and an "unforgivable betrayal".
Fox Hunting
One divisive issue that has emerged is Heather Humphreys' attitude to fox hunting.
Questioned on this, she has couched her response as supporting the right of people to enjoy "rural pursuits".
"There’s a lot of controls in place around rural pursuits, and I think once the rules are abided by, I support rural pursuits," she said.
Catherine Connolly voted in support of a proposed bill in the Dáil this year that would ban fox hunting.
However, in RTÉ’s Prime Time debate, she added that foxes were a threat and spoke of a need for humane controls.
