If we hold the M-W editors to the standard of only using "real" words, then a contradiction is present. If "cromulent" has not yet reached their threshold for

If we hold the M-W editors to the standard of only using "real" words, then a contradiction is present. If "cromulent" has not yet reached their threshold for inclusion, then they themselves should not be using it in casual language. Contrapositively, if they are using it casual language, then presumably it has reached their threshold for inclusion as a word. For them to casually use the word as though it were real after arguing that it is not harms their credibility as arbiters of what words are or are not real, despite the comedic value of them doing so here.