My first conspiracy theory about GE 2020

So I woke up to this story:

GE2020: PM Lee accepts PAP candidate Ivan Lim’s withdrawal; says ‘thorough investigation’ not possible given nature of GE campaign

“I recognise that the controversy over my candidacy has eclipsed the core issues of what this election should be about — Singapore’s future and the difficult steps we have to take to recover from Covid-19,” Mr Lim wrote.
“The controversy has also caused intense pain and stress for my family. I cannot put my family through this,” he added. “I thank the party for giving me this opportunity to serve.”

In accepting Mr Lim’s withdrawal, Mr Lee [PM] said that the controversy over his candidature was unfortunate.
“Ideally, there would have been a fair and deliberate consideration of these allegations. Unfortunately, the nature of the campaign is such that we do not have time for a thorough investigation,” Mr Lee said in his reply to Mr Lim.
“The allegations spread like wildfire online, eclipsing the serious life and death issues we must grapple with,” Mr Lee, who is also the prime minister, added.

With this commentary by Lee Hsien Yang:

GE2020: Ivan Lim saga raises questions about PAP’s candidate screening process, says Lee Hsien Yang

During a walkabout at Holland Village, in Tanjong Pagar Group Representation Constituency (GRC), he was asked to comment on the criticisms that had been lobbed against Mr Lim in the past week. Mr Lee was formally inducted into PSP on Wednesday and the party has not said whether he will contest in this General Election.
“I don’t know whether (PAP) knew or didn’t know about some of these issues. If they knew about it, they didn’t seem prepared for it,” he said.
“And if they didn’t know about it, then perhaps one should worry that the screening process is not as thorough as it can be. But you know, one has to hear what the person in concern has to say. I think some of the people who gave feedback have also been prepared to come forward. I am only a bystander in this.”

And he raises some pertinent questions.

1) Did the PAP know about these issues?
2) Why didn't their screening catch these issues when the just the mere announcement of his candidacy brought these issues to the surface?
3) Were the PAP prepared for this?


Scenario 1/Explanation 1

The usual screening process involves asking people who worked with a potential candidate about the candidate - his strengths, his weaknesses, his flaws, his character, skeletons in his closet or under his bed.

But because of Work From Home, circuit breaker and the shutdown of Singapore's social life, it was almost impossible to do the usual screening, other than on paper, and based simply on the candidate's self-presentation.

So maybe they did not catch it. Thus when the controversy arose, they basically left the candidate to fend for himself:

PAP’s vice-chairman Masagos Zulkifli had addressed the online criticism surrounding Mr Lim, saying it is important for candidates to prove themselves against any allegations.
He said that the General Election is the time when people who have been introduced will “elicit responses” such as these complaints about Mr Lim.
“(It is) also an opportunity for them, if they have done something in the past, to redeem themselves, because we have seen qualities in all our candidates that make them, what we think, good leaders that will serve our people well,” he said.

Mr Heng said. “We expect our candidates to be able to stand up and address any concerns that were raised about them. The key, as I mentioned, is whether that individual has the heart to serve all Singaporeans. And this is most important for us — you must have the heart to serve all citizens.”

Scenario 2

"So this Ivan, can or cannot?"

"He very yaya papaya. Ask him some simple questions, get angry. Dunwan to answer my question. Say it's just people's own attitude. And that he cannot answer their..." (refers to notes) "'vague and non-specific accusations'."

"What is your assessment?"

"You can see lor! He gets defensive when I probe even a little bit. Maybe he just have a KL face, so people dun like him..."

"So you cannot recommend him?"

"On paper, he looks very good. For the standard questions, he answers very well. Almost like he has '10-year series' answers."

"But....?"

"But got many people say they dun like him for 'vague and non-specific' reasons, and that he yaya like papaya. And his attitude kena sai, one..."

"Ok. You write up your assessment based on what you have, what people said about him, and send your assessment to me. I will make the recommendation upwards."

"Sorry if I a bit kaypoh, ah, but what are you going to recommend?"

"I'll give a qualified recommendation, and flag him as the Persian Flaw."

"Ahhhh."


Scenarion 3

"So Ivan has withdrawn his candidacy."

"I guess his past was not the history he believed."

"We did tell him, there is no statute of limitation for scandal... especially if people want to politicise it. People with long memories will bring up incidents in the past that may not have any relevance to the issues of today."

"Except to prosecute his character."

"He was confident that it was all behind him."

"Yeah. The Brazil thing was an easy wash. But the other accusations, harder to refute. It almost comes down to 'you say, I say'."

"But at least he realised quickly that it was going to be a quagmire. And there would be no viable exit once he engages. "

"Yes. That speaks to his presence of mind and tactical foresight."

"Yes. Pity. Too bad his foresight did not extend to his... 'blindspots'. "

"Well, he still served a purpose."

"I guess. There hasn't been any other 'revelations' about the other candidates."

"I'm confident there won't be. Not after social media has fell Ivan."