Political pundits are baffled over Donald Trump's ability to break all the political rules
As soon as Donald Trump was announced the winner of Saturday's South Carolina Republican presidential primary, political pundits tried to wrap their heads around how it happened.
A few were blunt:
This guy called Ted Cruz a p--sy, said W lied about WMD, got into a fight with the Pope, peddled an nasty anti-Muslim hoax, and STILL won SC
— Sam Stein (@samsteinhp) February 21, 2016
Attack military spending. Challenge party doctrine on 9/11 and Iraq. Defend Planned Parenthood and universal health care. Win SC primary.
— Alec MacGillis (@AlecMacGillis) February 21, 2016
While others downplayed the win:
this election confounds conventional wisdom, so perhaps fact that no Republican who wins NH and SC has lost the primary does not=a Trump win
— Jake Blumgart (@jblumgart) February 21, 2016
Bush leaving the race obviously bad news for Trump. Does anyone think a single Bush voter will go to Trump?
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) February 21, 2016
Some also poked fun at how wrong people have been regarding the frontrunner:
Never forget. pic.twitter.com/CHkqaD8J8J
— daveweigel (@daveweigel) February 21, 2016
There are a handful of pundits, however, not sitting with their heads in their hands, asking why:
I really feel like all of the pundits that downplayed Trump's chances of being a serious presidential contender should have to sit 2016 out.
— Joel D. Anderson (@byjoelanderson) February 21, 2016
This limits pundit commentary to the field of @mboyle1, @AnnCoulter and @jfradioshow https://t.co/2tyNIko5QH
— andrew kaczynski (@BuzzFeedAndrew) February 21, 2016
TRUMP VICTORY SPEECH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I hope he takes a shot at the Pope.
— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) February 21, 2016