Having actively participated in the presidential election of 2011, my experience left me disheartened. Despite investing a significant amount of personal funds, exceeding $100,000, and enduring a grueling campaign that spanned several weeks, I received less than 5% of the votes and lost my $50,000 deposit. This outcome was a profound personal disappointment.

The aftermath of the election proved to be equally challenging. I was unjustly blamed by some for splitting the votes and allegedly causing the defeat of their favored candidate, Tan CB, by a slim margin. Such baseless and malicious accusations implied that the presidency was somehow owed to Tan CB, undermining the essence of fair competition.

For the upcoming presidential election, I have already retired from my full-time office by more than 16 years, surpassing the qualifying period of 15 years that was in place during the 2011 election. Hence, I would be ineligible. However, I recently learned that the qualifying period has been extended to 20 years, which made me eligible. I am puzzled as to why the government made this change.

It occurred to me that the other two losing candidates from the 2011 election, Tan CB and Tan JS, might also qualify under the current rules. I thought that they would stand a better chance, since they garnered more votes than I did previously. However, I later discovered that these two candidates would not meet the current requirement of having run an organization with shareholder's equity of $500 million, an increase from the $100 million requirement in 2011. Consequently, I am the only candidate among the three who remains eligible under the revised criteria.

Despite my eligibility, I find myself uninterested in pursuing the presidency. I am now 75 years old, and my family members strongly object to my involvement due to the traumatic experiences they endured during the previous election, including ridicule from certain individuals who knew them. 

I was happy to learn that George Goh has expressed interest and enthusiasm in participating as an independent candidate, offering a refreshing alternative to the ruling party. He has assembled an impressive team and devised a compelling campaign strategy. Unfortunately, some friends have informed me that George Goh does not meet the candidacy requirements and is unlikely to be approved.

Under these circumstances, my friends have urged me to enter the race in order to prevent a walkover. They perceived that it is a "duty" for me to participate, given my eligibility. If I were to accept this duty, would there be a reciprical duty for those who wish to see an independent president to come forward and actively support my candidacy?

One suggestion proposed that I submit my application for eligibility and, in the event that George Goh's candidacy is approved as well, I could withdraw my application to avoid splitting the votes. This course of action would be seen as a noble gesture made in the interest of the people.

However, if George Goh's candidacy was rejected, I might have to stand against the candidate supported by the ruling party and would face significant disadvantages. Without the backing of a political party, I would struggle to effectively reach out to the people and communicate my message.

What should I do? As the days unfold, I hope for some form of enlightenment that may provide clarity and guidance regarding my potential involvement in the upcoming election.