It’s a punishing schedule for competitors as yesterday’s victors launch straight into today’s Sweet 16 contest. We’ll start here with yesterday’s results, followed by today’s polls, then finally the judges’ ballots for yesterday.

Results: Round Two, Northeast and Southeast

Northeast

**(1) @intelwire: 67%, 2.5 of five judges
(8) @BFriedmanDC: 33%, 2.5 of five judges

An even split in the judging doesn’t matter to @intelwire who takes the day on the strength of the popular vote.

(5) @chrisalbon: 51%, 1.5 of five judges
**(4) @SlaughterAM: 49%, 3.5 of five judges

@chrisalbon’s slender lead in the popular vote is not enough to upend @SlaughterAM, who advances to the Sweet 16 thanks to the judges.

**(11) @JimmySky: 64%, 2.5 of five judges
(3) @astridhka: 36%, 2.5 of five judges

Another judges’ split, another decision for the popular vote, and @JimmySky is moving on.

(10) @elsnarkistani: 36%, 2.5 of five judges
**(2) @attackerman: 64%, 2.5 of five judges

The third of three even splits in the judges’ ballots is decided by the popular vote for @attackerman.

Southeast

(1) @adamserwer: 55%, two of five judges’ votes
**(9) @drjjoyner: 45%, three of five judges’ votes

@drjjoyner edges one out over @adamserwer by taking three of five judges’ votes.

**(5) @smsaideman: 51%, five of five judges’ votes
(4) @gregorydjohnsen: 49%, zero of five judges’ votes

An extremely close race in the popular polls, @smsaideman cruises to victory with a sweep of the judges.

(6) @naheedmustafa: 40% (39.73%), three of five judges’ votes
**(3) @azelin: 60% (60.26%), two of five judges’ votes

The closest race in TFC history, we had to go to hundredths of a percent in the popular voting to determine the winner. One vote was the difference that put @azelin over the top.

(7) @johnsonr: 41%, one of five judges’ votes
**(2) @joshuafoust: 59%, four of five judges’ votes

@joshuafoust takes the popular vote and the judges’ vote to take an easy victory.

Sweet 16

In the Sweet 16, there are five judges for each side of the brackets, East and West. The panel’s judgment will count for 50% of the vote, with each judge representing 10% of the overall total. The other 50% is based on the popular vote via the public polls below, so make sure to cast your votes! The judging panels for today are as follows:

West

@AllThingsHLS
@ArminRosen
@CaldwellGR
@jeffemanuel
@petulantskeptic

East

@drfarls
@parafille
@RBStalin
@wjrue
@zackbeauchamp

Their votes account for half of each contestant’s score. Your votes make up the other half:

West

East

Now for your Round Two Judges’ Ballots!

Northeast

@kensofer

First and foremost, a big thank you to @caidid for putting this together. It’s an insane amount of logistical work and prep that creates a venue for such awesome twitter battles.

Onto the battles!

@ElSnarkistani made an early attempt to cut out @attackerman’s legs, but like the Yankee fan he is, @attackerman embraced his role as Goliath and quickly dismissed the pleas of his opponent. @ElSnarkistani responded by subtweeting the shit out of @attackerman. Ackerman is never an easy draw in TFC, but I’m awarding Gary the win for the range of interesting articles he offered his followers throughout the day.

WINNER: @ElSnarkstani

After a deafening silence to begin the day by both @SlaughterAM and @chrisalbon, they both came roaring out of the gate. @SlaughterAM gets dinged for retweeting so many people talking about how great her article is. But I’m an attention whore and do the same thing, so I’ll let it slide. Albon’s early lead is buried by a slow, methodical landslide from Slaughter.

WINNER: @SlaughterAM

@BFriedmanDC walked into his matchup with a tough @intelwire knowing he had to play to his strengths and not let @intelwire dictate the tempo of the game. Brandon stayed in his lane and reinforced his reputation as one of the best on twitter when it comes to veterans and military personnel issues. But Berger wins the match with a heavy flood of good articles and retweets. Berger shows he’s not afraid of his opponent, retweeting him twice.

WINNER: @intelwire

@astridhka effectively works the Africa offense, with a brief aside to shit talk Boston (as a Laker fan, this plays well with me). Much like the Princeton offense, it’s a highly effective, but difficult to translate to a larger stage. @jimmysky counters with a good high-low game: SHOT: Lording over both his current and former opponents in a good display of braggadocio. CHASER: Several pictures of his adorable kids, Kid A and Creep. Jimmy nears flies off the rails when distracted by a fake congressman and several Chris Hayes-related puns, but good veteran play keeps it together and he holds on for the W.

WINNER: @jimmysky

@laurenist

In the long tradition of Drunk History and Drunk Kitchen, I present to you Drunk TFC Judging. (I don’t know, dudes, Science Club’s white wine is strong.)

(1) @intelwire vs. (8) @BFriedmanDC

Look, this isn’t a Twitter Expert Club or a Twitter Rational Argument Club, this is Twitter Fight Club. And @BFriedmanDC is fighting someone on Twitter just about every day. Today? Fighting on Twitter. Yesterday? Fighting on Twitter. Tomorrow? He will be fighting on Twitter. Every day, @BFriedmanDC comes to Twitter ready to do battle with He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named and that he does.

Hands down, @BFriedmanDC takes this round. Butterbeer is on him.

(4) @SlaughterAM vs. (5) @chrisalbon

The least Twitter fight-y of all the Northeast division fights. What’s a tipsy judge to do? As fellow judge @zoonpolitikon notes, @chrisalbon is the only one to have Tweeted about Twitter Fight Club and so, as one of the arbitrary rules I have made up about Twitter Fight Club is that one must talk about Twitter Fight Club, this round goes to @chrisalbon.

In @chrisalbon vs. @CONFLCTMRCOFFEE, though, we all know who the true winner is.

(3) @astridhka vs. (11) @JimmySky

So on the one hand we have someone who has served their country in harsh environments and to this day strives to make the world a better place by educating the people of Twitter about esoteric information. And on the other hand we have @JimmySky. He was in the Air Force.

Look, @JimmySky is a great guy with kids who are probably smarter than us (yes, maybe even smarter than @stcolumbia). He owes me a beer, though. @astridhka is an Africanist who we all want to see go up against @texasinafrica. I know what the people want. I know that I want beer. @astridhka wins this one. Unless it turns out she was in the Coast Guard.

(2) @attackerman vs. (10) @ElSnarkistani

@ElSnarkistani came out fighting early with the brownnosing Tweets and the effusive retweets. He even managed to be in a branch of the military that wasn’t the Air Force. @attackerman was, like, working on stuff? Like reporting? Come on, man, this is Twitter Fight Club. Deadlines can wait.

This one is close. Chris Hayes jokes or F-35 videos? Wait, those were both @attackerman. I love a good CERP reference, @ElSnarkistani, but by a hair @attackerman gets the KO this round with LockMart’s terrible PR video.

I apologize to everyone for everything. Good night.

@rei_tang

“Twitter Fight Club is like the greatest covert war taking place in history today: the struggle for Eastern Europe.” - Stratfor founder and chairman George Friedman

Many Twitter fighters have questioned the reasoning and criteria for judging, and many judges have developed ever more rigorous methodologies to weigh our Twitter fighters against each other.

lol

My match-ups fought even less this time and I am disappoint. Again, as a judge, I want my day of hyper-vigilance over the blows in my Twitter feed to be worth it.

@intelwire
@BFriedmanDC

Let us go to the source of the struggle. What are they fighting for?

@BFriedmanDC says,

@intelwire says,

Did @BFriedmanDC scale Everest? His feed was a massive subtweet to IAVA’s rabid criticism of the VA. Is this a sub-twitter fight? Did he file all these cabinets himself?

Did @intelwire make music? Well, he pals around with terrorists.

(Okay, what he is doing is pretty bad ass)

Neither really engaged in TFC. I must vote on their potential, in which case, this must go to @intelwire, who took a little more effort with TFC, and who argued with a terrorist with aplomb.

@chrisalbon
@SlaughterAM

First, I was going to vote for @chrisalbon.

Then,

And @chrisalbon had no response.

Winner: @slaughteram.

@JimmySky
@astridhka

Winner: @JimmySky and his superhero offspring. @astridhka did not really have anything.

Superhero offspring.

And what he is fighting for.

@elsnarkistani
@attackerman

At first, @elsnarkistani was pandering like I had never seen.

A class act with a clear understanding of how TFC works. But, then I remembered, @attackerman had pre-pandered.

No, this was not pre-pandering. Could he have guessed I would be judging three days in advance? This was more.

Then came the fight.

A lot happened, but this should explain what went down.

Winner: @attackerman, because a pre-pandering Taliban panda simply has a permanent hold over the population, despite the best efforts of Western invaders. @elsnarkistani, this was a tough call. Everyone should follow you. I hope you will still follow me. I will give you the last tweet.

Finally, a bit more advice to those aspiring to attain my vote. Jon Roberts was a horrible criminal who smuggled cocaine for the Medellin cartel in Miami during the 1980s. Don’t do anything he did. But he said, “If you have a problem, choose the most evil way to solve it, and do the evil as forcefully as you can. That’s how you come out on top.” I encourage you to do this for TFC.

@zoonpolitikon

This was tough.

Before the competition started, I imagined myself with a cocktail in my hand on the private yacht of one of the contestants, spending all the bribes I got. Then I would have given my vote to the highest bidder. It turned out it is much more work. Here is me trying to come to a conclusion:

Southeast

@aelkus

My personal metrics are as follows:

1. Candidate vs. Candidate disses
2. Pandering to me on Iranian food, cute animals on the Internet, or the superiority of Los Angeles sports teams.
3. Quality of tweets.

1 and 3 are completely subjective. 2 concerns some things that are important to me: the kabobs I now frequently consume as exam comfort food, cute animals on the Internet (who doesn’t like them), and proper recognition of the awesomeness of my home town.

1. drjoyner

Neither competed against each other for the prize. Score: 0

Neither pandered to me about Iranian food, cute animals, or Los Angeles. Score: 0

I enjoyed Joyner’s discussion of a wider range of issues, from cyberwar to veteran’s services. Serwer’s feed, while scintillating, did not demonstrate the same range. Joyner 1, Serwer 0.

2. smsaideman

Both contestants have a solid body of work on Twitter covering a wide range of national security issues. So this came down to pandering and twitterfighting skills. I gave both a .5 rating for tie. Johnsen .5, Saideman .5

Saideman is strong in twitterfighting. As I previously noted, Saideman’s maple-themed tweets have the demonic power of a million giant inflatable beevers. When Saideman gets worked up, it looks like the Winter Olympics out there. Yet Johnsen impressively parried many of his barbs with oppo research twitpics, so I will have to give this one to him. Johnsen 1.5, Saideman .5.

Saideman pandered to me with cute animal pictures and videos (a baby polar cub), and LA-themed RTs. Johnsen, however, subtweeted that I was the Twitter equivalent of a corrupt Jordanian flaunting wasta. Bad movie, Johnsen! This one went to Saideman. Johnsen 1.5, Saideman 1.5

So how did I decide? Well, Saideman spoke frequently of his generosity to political science and IR grad students. As a 1-st year PhD student in IR, I appreciate that. Johnsen 1.5, Saideman, 2.5.

6. azelin

Mustafa and Zelin both went hard. But Zelin’s raw aggression, complete with cyberwar put-downs, gave him an edge in the twitterfighting category. Mustafa 0, Zelin 1

Neither Mustafa nor Zelin engaged in any pandering, and both RT’d Johnsen’s subtweet at me. So no point for either. Mustafa 0, Zelin 1.

Zelin delivered top-notch goods on Middle East and North Africa. Mustafa had some goods but also tweeted a bit about overly earnest people on her train. So point to Zelin. Mustafa 0, Zelin 2.

7. @joshuafoust

Perhaps out of her strong sense of ethics, Johnson did not engage in pandering. Likewise Foust, knowing not to do things for free (and with no guarantee he would come out on top of the combined judge/popular vote if he pandered.) refrained from pandering. So Foust 0, Johnson 0.

Johnson and Foust did not engage in much fighting. However, Johnson made a solid case for her own candidacy and beat back critics, so I will give her 0.5. Foust, 0, Johnson 0.5.

Substance: Johnson discussed many important subjects. However, Foust also did this while engaging many twitter personalities large and small on substantive discussion of the issues. Johnson 0.5, Foust 1.

@EricMartin24

(1)@adamserwer vs. (9)@drjjoyner

The top of the bracket features a truly brutal match-up between a pair of Twitter Titans (Twitans?) that I happen to also like on a personal level (to the extent one can develop such sentimental connections without ever having met in the flesh world). My first thought when looking at this contest was, “How the hell is @drjjoyner only a #9 seed?” Granted, he’s not overly combative or snarky, but his almost grating reliance on common sense and decency should have been enough to catapult him into #3 seed territory.

That said, this is TwitterFightClub and I’m not sure @drjjoyner put up enough of a fight to upend a #1 seed (where wwas the pointing and laughing, the touting of gaffes, the compromising photos, the bribes, the beards?)…That, and @adamserwer’s liveblogging of the Prop 8 arguments was nicely done.

Alas, @drjjoyner’s sense of honor cost him the match (that, and the fact that he was wrongly seeded).

Winner: @adamserwer

(5) @smsaideman vs. (4) @gregorydjohnsen

This match featured much of the TFC spice that the (1)-(9) contest lacked - dueling beards, working the refs (praise for Don Mattingly and the Yankees from a Mets fan no less), the brandishing of arms (was that a spear?), a bucket of qat, the donning of embarrassing costumes…really, the spirit of TwitterFightClub combat.

In fact, I was so impressed with the showing from both participants that I’ve agonized (read: spent more than 1 minute) over my decision.

In the end, despite @gregorydjohnsen ridiculous k-nowledge of all things Yemen (and embarrassing ultimate frisbee/bandana expose), I’m casting my vote for @smsaideman under the rationale that one of them has to be declared the winner…

Winner: @smsaideman

(6) @naheedmustafa vs. (3) @azelin

This match certainly had promise - at least initially. @naheedmustafa jumped out early with a preemptive strike of judge shmoozing, and a shocking expose of @azelin’s use of French (hard to vote for a surrender monkey talkin guy). But then at some point in the middle the thing went soft..Twitter Kindness Club? Oy. Luckily, the intensity pushed past “soft slap fight” toward the tail end of the contest…

Although I’m loathe to endorse two Canadians in a row, socialism wins by a tea-cup…

Winner: @naheedmustafa

(7) @johnsonr vs. (2) @joshuafoust

The (2) - (7) contest closely resembled the (1) - (9) in its lack of fireworks. And, as with the (1) - (9), the lack of big strikes favors the higher seed. Simply not enough done on the part of @johnsonr to overcome @joshuafoust’s #2 seed, and his shameless pimping of the pug for sympathy votes. Effective nevertheless.

Winner: @joshuafoust

@jasminchill

(1) @adamserwer vs (9) @drjjoyner

While @adamserwer is a prolific tweeter with 4x @drjjoyner’s followers, it all seems to be related to his day job and there was no acknowledgment that he was even participating in TFC13 nor any actual contact made on his part towards his opponent. That might be acceptable in the first round but not in the second. Penalties awarded.

In addition to the fact that @drjjoyner bothered to follow me, he had no qualms about retweeting @AbuMuqawamaPMC ‘s back-handed but amusing advocacy for him:

Advantage: @drjjoyner

(5) @smsaideman vs (4) @gregorydjohnsen

@smsaideman got to an early start pandering to the judges and slamming his late-starting opponent. @gregorydjohnsen replied with beard pictures, just in case that would sway ones vote.

The battle was quickly described as “fighting the dark arts” (https://twitter.com/smsaideman/status/316576794369208320/photo/1) vs fighting in the real world to defend one’s flat (http://t.co/dDbMZrNTiD)

@smsaideman pointed out his use of pop culture in lecturing IR (http://t.co/Mib9iS5ztv) although I noted that he had not bothered to fully research the pop culture reference to realise it was a complex multipolar scenario. Given said pop culture reference was the rather superb Game of Thrones, the penalties & points awarded evened out.

@gregorydjohnsen appeared to have compiled a dirt file that included sporting photos of his opponent which were quickly used in an effective ambush, points awarded.

The flipside was I found the superhero ones amusing (https://twitter.com/smsaideman/status/316578702081265664/photo/1) and endearing (https://twitter.com/gregorydjohnsen/status/316729026301538305/photo/1). I’m a geek & can’t help awarding points for cosplay & general tomfoolery.

Having earlier posted bearded photos, @gregorydjohnsen had a change of heart on pandering & compared the judges to an unfavourable experience in Jordan. I would’ve given him serious points for guts in taking on the judges had he bothered to address my challenges and hints. But he didn’t.

@gregorydjohnsen also seemed to take a +4hr break without bothering to field a child/dog/work /warfare excuse for his absence. These two events might not seem much but it was just enough for me to reverse my earlier judging sentiments. That said, his reengagement may be in time to gain him the popular vote (since its predominantly after the judges cut-off).

Advantage (in spite of his admitting liking our truly awful capital city Canberra): @smsaideman

(6) @naheedmustafa vs(3) @azelin

This battle got off to a nauseating start with both competitors seemingly set upon engaging in “Twitter Kindness Club 2013 #TKC13”. Thankfully this soon ended although the quality of the fighting didn’t improve much.

@naheedmustafa doesn’t follow my feed but did pander to how “chill” I must be and offered me tea. @azelin countered with an early #FF to the judges.

@azelin took on the judges asking why we didn’t like arguments over peanut butter and pickles, Austria & strategic airpower, thereby missing the point that the lack of blood spilt, not topic was the source of our disappointment. Points for guts and judge interaction, minor deduction for not henceforth initiating a less shallow fight.

I nearly gave it to @azelin outright for being referred to as the Prince of all things Jihad (and having a generally better feed).

But also desperately wanted to see @naheedmustafa make good on her threat to make @AbuMuqawamaPMC rue the day he endorsed her opponent. It was a moment of real feistiness!

Advantage (but is going to need to up game to survive @AbuMuqawamaPMC, let alone her opponents in the next round): @NaheedMustafa

(7) @johnsonr vs (2) @joshuafoust

This was always going to be a tough one for me, I’ve been a committed follower of @joshuafoust for some time but as he himself said, “blind loyalty is dumb” and @johnsonr distinguished herself in #TFC13 Round 1 as an intelligent and highly amusing competitor with cute dobermanns and possessing serious gumption.

I noted that @AbuMuqawamaPMC weighing into the battle between these two brought it to an all new (truly horrible) TFC low: https://twitter.com/AbuMuqawamaPMC/status/316606980208873472

@joshuafoust strength is not just in the breadth of his feed but the commentary he inserts into his tweets & his quick response to most tweets in his direction. @johnsonr engaged quickly with anyone who tweeted her and amassed an impressive collection of advocates, some of whom even lobbied me directly.

I would’ve awarded this one to @joshuafoust based on the high quality of his tweeting & his quick ending of any dog sympathy advantage being directed towards @johnsonr but given my minor penalty to @gregorydjohnsen for taking an unexplained break, I couldn’t let near on 7hrs of unexplained silence and non-participation go unanswered.

Advantage: @johnsonr

@juliaaberman

I came into the SE bracket much less familiar with the competitors than in my last judging round, so I tried to largely judge each contestant on their output between 10am and 10pm Tuesday. As a judge with a straight IR/African Studies field of knowledge, I perhaps find different topics/discussions appealing than some of the NatSec folks. I tend to favor a lot of aggressive pandering to TFC judges, though quality of content can certainly overcome the massive flaw of having a life/feed that don’t revolve around TFC.

(1) @adamserwer
(9) @drjjoyner
@adamserwer began the day at a disadvantage in terms of TFC tweeting because he was doing real work at the SCOTUS. While this didn’t allow him to interact with TFC, he provided a solid summary of the conversations happening at the court, which is a real-world service to his followers. @drjjoyner similarly didn’t engage much with TFC. I agree with the below tweet in my ultimate judging, though I deeply enjoyed @adamserwer’s SCOTUS snark.

(5) @smsaideman
(4) @gregorydjohnsen
@smsaideman came in strong from the word go, pandering aggressively to the judges and making sure I, as an Africanist, knew about his @texasinafrica endorsement. He even made an infographic about the matchup! As a recovered grad student, I did enjoy him framing the fight as “what not do to” as a grad student (i.e., be an historian - truth). His output was also truly impressive - at certain points, he sent a tweet a minute. @gregorydjohnsen was a bit clearer on when his TFC round would take place, and did a fair amount of directly countering his competitor’s attacks with proof of his work (links to video, etc). He also apparently can take down a LOT of qat. @gregorydjohnsen compared judges expecting banter/bribes to wasta, and focused largely on proving his competitiveness by his prodigious output, while @smsaideman proved to be one of the most impressive sycophants I’ve seen in #TFC13. In the end, it’s a matter of style, and I like my TFC fought dirty.

(6) @naheedmustafa
(3) @azelin
Both contestants started out the day adorably complimenting one another and half-heartedly tearing one another down, plus kitten pictures! Each got in a direct interaction with the judges early, which always earns points in my book. @naheedmustafa was very thorough in her judge interaction/bribing efforts, willing to say anything to get an endorsement, while @azelin was less blatant with flattery but quite responsive and followed his judges - always a smart move. I can’t do it. Ok, fine, @azelin by the tiniest of noses, mainly because a RT in his feed made me cry. Is that fair? Probably not. I have a headache.

(7) @johnsonr
(2) @joshuafoust
Of the entire SE bracket, @joshuafoust was somehow the only person I came into TFC following. His facial hair is also immaculate. johnsonr admitted early on that she would be busy on Tuesday (partly with a sick dog, and I cannot in good conscience vote someone down when their dog is sick). Neither had huge engagement with TFC, but by midday I learned @joshuafoust ALSO has a recently-sick dog, so that voting standard fell apart. My friend @aurallyfit focuses on Russia/Central Asia and lobbied hard for @joshuafoust because, and I quote, “he’s right about Russia, and Russia is important, just like Africa.” Naturally, that solid argument combined with my previous awareness of @joshuafoust’s not-insubstantial output and his ability to keep up with TFC while in Moscow made him today’s winner.

@rockrichard

Getting vanquished in the first round of #TFC13 apparently doesn’t put you out of the fold, as I’m back from the dead to judge round two. To be honest, there was a time I tweeted nearly exclusively about security and IR subjects, but a change in career path has significantly altered my production and consumption of such material. As such, I was surprised to even be included in the first round, but enjoyed judging the second round more as it allowed me delve into some of my interests that have gone neglected as of late.

(1) @adamserwer
(9) @drjjoyner

I swung both ways throughout the day on this match up. First thing I noticed was that Adam’s volume was significantly lower (not always a bad thing, but Adam generally tweets good things regardless of volume), but then I noticed he had tweeted he was without tech in the Supreme Court for today’s Prop 8 oral arguments. Possibly sacrificing #TFC13 to witness history got him mad respect points. Then, James decided to make a race of it by tweeting about policy implications of military retiree health care, a pet subject of mine. But then James tweeted this:

Which, as an employ of the agency to which he refers, I know to be wholly inaccurate. People shouldn’t be experts on everything. But tweeting an assumption as if it were settled fact is problematic. There was also this Tweet:

And as a fellow Southerner, I sympathize with Ex on this smear that I like to refer to as “Clampettization”.

But then James tweeted his concern when I tweeted about heading to the ER for an illness. Pandering, sure, but isn’t that what #TFC13 is about?

Finally, I remembered that Adam can always be counted on for a light and I often forget my cigarette lighter.

Adam had some great analysis on the SCOTUS hearing, and James was wrong on two issues I care deeply about (granted, those two were in a sea of highly informative Tweets).

Point, Serwer.

(5) @smsaideman
(4) @gregorydjohnsen

Stephen took the early lead by pandering to my love of war stories from my 2007 Afghanistan deployment and NBA basketball. Gregory made it competitive, though, with tweets on Flannery O’Conner, secession (again, I’m a diasporic Southerner) and fascinating stuff about Yemen. On the other hand, he has a really weak beard whereas Stephen’s beard is somewhat glorious (I expect Stephen to quote that compliment as a blurb on his next book).

My vote goes to @smsaideman.

(6) @naheedmustafa
(3) @azelin

Naheed starts with the significant handicapped of having her bio indicate that she is in Canada. I spent time in Canada once. It’s not something I want to re-experience. If Tim Horton’s white hot chocolate and crullers weren’t a thing (the TH trailer at Kandahar Airfield is a bit of a theater Shrangri-La) I’d have nothing good to say about the place. However, she did call me one of “the smartest people on twitter”. The fact that the other “smartest people on twitter” were also judges on her match up, I’m assuming, was pure coincidence.

Aaron, on the other hand proved himself to be an exceptionally apt panderer, and based on his cartoon avatar has quite the beard. For this match up, however, beard possession has to be thrown out as a criterion.

Beards and country of residence aside, this race was probably a draw for me. Therefore, I’m going to make what is probably a controversial activist vote.

Naheed raised the undervalued concern of women’s issues in IR, and we desperately need more women voices in the IR sphere. Definitely consider this a message that addressing women’s issues earns you points in #TFC13. My vote is for Naheed to keep this subject matter relevant in the next round.

(7) @johnsonr
(2) @joshuafoust

Rebecca gets a head start for being a specialist on uniformed issues, a subject dear to my heart. But not by much as I’ve long been an admirer of Josh’s work.

Josh also spent most of the day on some smart analysis on the subject of RussoAmeriEuro Atlanticism. Really interesting stuff on some incentives (or lack of) that I hadn’t previously thought about in depth.

I really wanted to support Rebecca. I like her subject matter, I have a soft spot for the underdog and she definitely brought the “love of the game” factor with a plethora of #TFC13 hashtagged tweets. But she spent most of the day on the road to do great things and care for her dogs. If I had my druthers, I’d call for a mulligan for Rebecca so she could face this tough opponent on a day when she could more actively participate. Unfortunately, there are no second acts in #TFC13 (except as a judge), and thus my vote is for Foust.