I don't necessarily approve of the pitchforks coming out at the sight of a MAGA hat, but it's either delusional or just intellectually dishonest to deny the racial component to Trump's rhetoric.

Just like everything in California causes cancer, everything Trump says has racial components.

Sheesh - for a racist spouting rhetoric full of racial components Trump is pretty awful at actually being a racist. Just look at his immediate family! He's not only an incompetent politician he's an incompetent racist!

I'm not asserting that Trump is personally racist, nor that all of his platform is racist. I think the term 'racist' as a concept has such divergent meaning across society that it's rarely useful. I'm saying he is leveraging the dimensions of the current political landscape to his advantage (something he has bragged about having no scruples in doing), which includes exacerbating racial tension. Is it more a projection of his followers than himself? Probably.

It's either delusional or just intellectually dishonest to impute "racial components" to Trump's rhetoric. He, and MAGA types in general, is not racist nor has anything he's done explainable by "racism". The persistence of imputing "racist!" belies projection, lacking an objective basis. We really, truly, don't care what race anyone is; what matters is hard work, abiding by laws (including immigration laws shared by most nations), and earning your way. Alas, those seeking racism everywhere see racism everywhere, especially in designated opponents.

But enough of his supporters have that the culture of support for Trump has been conflated with support for those other, far more toxic ideals.

Trump supporters can pretend that American white supremacists and neo-reactionaries didn't flock to him like moths to a flame and turn his campaign into a referendum against the loss of white male political and cultural relevance and the advance of progressivism and feminism, or that they aren't tainted by association, but that is what happened.

Trump supporters were perfectly aware of the racial narrative forming around him, and they chose to embrace it, rather than fight against it, because they found common ground with the racists in their hatred of the left and Hillary Clinton. They don't now have cause to complain about being tarred with the same brush.

If it's OK to exclude people thanks to 2nd degree taint like that, does this mean it would be fine for a conference to exclude everyone who supported Bernie because of his association with AntiFa?

"white supremacists and neo-reactionaries" are practically non-existent. Try actually understanding your designated opponents, instead of slapping nasty labels on them. We did NOT "choose to embrace a racial narrative", it was imputed on us and we don't know how to fight it effectively (a la "I don't believe X!" "well, that's surefire proof that you believe X!").