Breitbart Cites Gateway Pundit to Prove Trump Will "Win in a Landslide" Because He Has More Facebook Likes

This is the most 2016 thing that has ever happened. Here is a post in which Breitbart News cites Gateway Pundit in a non-joking way in order to convince their readers that Trump will “win in a landslide” because he’s doing better on social media than Hillary. The polls, you see, are fake, and are designed to prevent you from voting for Trump. What you really need to look at is who has more Facebook likes. I am not kidding:


From the Gateway Pundit:

Current polls show the race for President is much tighter than it really is.  Ann Coulter warned us years ago in her best seller Slanderthat Democrats and the liberal media always use polls to manipulate and discourage conservatives from voting.  Thanks to social media there is more and more evidence that the polls are way off and if things stay as they are, Trump will win in a landslide!

Now listen, I am the first to admit that I wrongly predicted that Trump was not going to win the nomination. So by no means is my record of political predictions unblemished. I wrongly overestimated the intelligence and critical thinking skills of a huge portion of Republican primary voters, and assumed that sufficient exposure to the fact that Trump does not know his elbow from his anus, lies habitually (especially to his supporters) and has no core principles (and that includes on immigration) would cause his voters to abandon him.

I was wrong, I admit it, my bad. You guys really proved all us elitists wrong by showing that you are not going to abandon a candidate for silly, outdated reasons like a lack of basic decency, honesty, or command of the issues.

I will say in my defense that the error I made was in assuming that someone would eventually pass Trump, not in assuming that Trump wasn’t ahead in the first place. By about December or January it was perfectly obvious that Trump’s 30-35% were not going anywhere no matter what, so the only question that remained was whether he would be able to get any portion of any of the other candidates’ voters. I assumed that the answer was “no,” and I wasn’t far off. When Trump effectively clinched after Indiana, he had at that time garnered about 38% of the primary vote, which showed that the rest of the GOP electorate was extraordinarily resistant to uniting behind him; if not for the refusal of some candidates (Kasich, cough) to drop out earlier and if not for the bizarre GOP rules, Trump never would have crossed the 50% threshold. But I digress.


Back then, sites like Breitbart and Gateway Pundit were loudly trumpeting every poll they could find, saying that poll showed it was over, suckers, everyone get on the Trump train. Fighting against Trump was worth doing so, but it turned out that the polls were more or less right – Trump had 35% of primary voters in his pocket no matter what and that was enough for him to be in the lead no matter what.

I am proud to say that at no point during the entire sad primary debacle did I attempt to suggest something as nonsensical as the fact that Trump’s social media presence means he is going to win in a landslide in spite of the fact that polls show that he is prepared to lose in a landslide. I mean, that is the same kind of crap the Ron Paul supporters claimed to believe for years, and I wonder how that worked out for them in 2008 and 2012? The idea that anyone would pass this off as a serious analysis is truly astounding, even for these jokers.

This kind of fantasy thinking is really what led to the rise of Trump and I am glad to see it being used in his service. When it turns out to be disastrously wrong, maybe some small percentage of his supporters will think twice about what sources they will trust to get their news. Not many, admittedly, but hopefully at least some.




Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos