The competition is explained here: each day, one bracket competes, with the winner of each matchup being partly about who gets the most votes and who the panel thinks tweeted the best on a given day. The winner should not be who did the best smack talk of the opponent, but rather who wrote the most interesting, engaging tweets on national security that day. I think. My strategy will be to try both, of course.
I am not that familiar with my first round opponent Gregory D. Johnsen. He has three times as many followers but tweets half as much. I expect him to win. Why?
- Because people go with the chalk (the favorite), even though he is PhD student,
- Because he is from Princeton and the Ivy guys always get the ladies and the twitter votes,
- Because he is an expert on at least one country more than me (Yemen),
- Because he seems to have better hair.
- Because current events might compel me to tweet about Canada--sure to be a losing topic for the American-centric folks making the decisions.
My sneaky advantage: my name is actually less likely to be misspelled. Whenever have I had that going for me? Competition starts next week.
Follow me at @smsaideman as I try to out-tweet, out-snark, and out-last a bunch of folks who are far sharper on national security stuff.