Likewise, anything publicly debated at work has to be inherently bland and without class consciousness, as that calls into question relationship between the workers, the professional management classes and the reigning neoliberal order. The only approved topics will ones that distract from class consciousness and divide the workers into factions that render them unable to operate cohesively.
It would really depend on the individual Trump supporter whether I would want to discuss politics with them or not.
However I don't think whether I 'want' the discussion has anything to do with anything. Discussion of communal affairs is basic to humans, and my 'wanting' has nothing to do with others' need and right to continue to be human. An employer does not own people (even during their hours of employment), and this kind of clause would be illegal in any reasonable polity.
Obnoxious behaviour, forcing of one's opinion (or neurotic need to discuss) on others, etc, is another matter and prevalent enough in plenty of areas quite outside of politics. The only simple authoritarian solution to that would be to ban conversation altogether.
Around 40% of voters support Donald Trump in some way. Are you sure you really want to discuss politics at work? Do you want someone wearing a MAGA hat explaining to everyone why immigration is too high?
Because that is what real political discussion will involve. In fact, I suspect many people who are advocating for politics at work, actually only want people whom they agree with to be able discuss policies that they generally agree with.
So for me, as long as the company does not prevent political activity outside of work, I am happy to have work be a neutral zone where people from opposite ends of the political spectrum can just work together on how to make money for the business.