In spite of all the shortcomings of the presidential race in Egypt, Egyptians are proud of their Revolution, which has led after a difficult transitional period to the first real presidential elections since the times of the pharaohs. They now do not know who the next president will be, because the odds of winning are nearly equal between at least four of the 13 candidates competing to reach the presidential seat. And regardless of the opinions held by citizens on the candidates and the smear campaigns that have targeted some of them from their competitors' supporters, in addition to the repeated mistakes that are usually committed during parliamentary elections, as well as the state of polarization among political forces and even segments of society, the violation of laws setting limits to electoral campaign spending and banning promotion at particular times, not to mention the “pollution" of the capital, its streets and public squares, as well as other Egyptian cities with the pictures and posters of candidates, a feeling of surprise prevails among a substantial number of Egyptians, who cannot believe that the dialogue that is imposing itself on them now concerns the presidential elections. The questions they are asking are usually about the chances each candidate has of winning, and they are confused about determining which candidate has the best chances of attaining the presidential seat. Yes, in the past, Egyptians would know the winner's name before the elections, before voting and before the results were announced, while they now wonder about the next president, and predict who he might be, analyzing the nature of the race and the competition. Thus, the candidate of the Society of the Muslim Brotherhood, Doctor Mohamed Morsy, seems to have the best chances, for numerous reasons that distinguish him from the rest of his competitors. Indeed, he is affiliated to a group that includes hundreds of thousands of supporters and activists who are trained and experienced in dealing with the “games" and secrets of elections. It is true that he had not originally been the Brotherhood's candidate in the presidential elections, but has come to replace Engineer Khairat Al-Shater whom the group had nominated at first, before he was excluded by the judicial commission supervising the elections. But those who have followed the Muslim brotherhood's record in past elections know that the candidate's name is not of much consequence to them or even to their supporters – and of course to those who vote for the Muslim Brotherhood from among the simple folk, who do not in the first place know the difference between Shater and Morsy, and who give their votes to the group's candidate, whoever he may be. And when it comes to the Brotherhood's experience in dealing with the “logistics" of voting day, no other group or candidate can compete with them. As for Doctor Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, his success so far has been a big surprise, as he has obtained the support of parties in opposition to each other, including Liberals, Salafists and Socialists, and of diverging age groups, from seniors to the youth. His use of revolutionary terminology has attracted the youth of the Revolution, and his history in the Muslim Brotherhood did not form an obstacle between him and those opposed to the Brotherhood, as in fact his leaving the group has earned him the support of some who have decided to vote for him to spite the Brotherhood. The case of Nasserist candidate Hamdeen Sabahi is quite similar to that of Aboul Fotouh. Indeed, his appropriate age, pragmatic language and revolutionary stances, in addition to his defiance of the Mubarak regime and the fact that he was jailed numerous times under the former regime, has attracted to him revolutionary groups as well as others who see in his appearance and image a suitable one for the president of the country. Moreover, his friendly relations with all political forces, including the Islamists, have prevented him from being targeted by the smear campaigns that have been directed at all the other candidates. Regarding Mr. Amr Moussa and Marshal Ahmed Shafik, it is certain that the candidacy of the latter has been harmful to that of the former in several ways. Indeed, Moussa had maintained good relations with revolutionary forces for a long while, and it is no secret that the Muslim Brotherhood itself had at one point during the transitional period examined the possibility of offering him its support, before abandoning the idea and nominating a candidate of its own. Yet the fact that Shafik has taken the step of waging the competition has made of them both the target of the other candidates' supporters. At the same time, an important voting bloc that would have headed towards Moussa is now held by Shafik. On the whole, the Egyptian presidential elections will still have their mistakes, flaws or negative aspects, but their benefits, positive aspects and gains will be much greater, even if Egyptians only gain them over future stages. Indeed, the flood always starts with a drop.
