That these terms have been used in questionable situations cannot preclude their use in situations where they are appropriate. It seems reasonable to conclude from this election cycle that Trump has been, at best, openly courting racism and misogony. This should be reasonable grounds to question his behaviour, given the position he ran for.
Is the proposal to use these terms more carefully, or in a more well qualified manner in situations where there is ambiguity? I’m not sure the left can or should co-ordinate this mass self-censorship. If claims based loosely, or not at all, on fact are alienating voters, then surely the Right would have done more damage to themselves then the Left did. What should the Left have done instead? I’d argue that the damage in this election was from the media being late to take Trump and his views seriously, to laugh off, rather than question his deeply concerning views.
We cannot withdraw from using descriptive words for the types of views expressed by anyone, and clearly with no exemption is deserved for those seeking public office. The controversial views of Trump, Bannon and the rest, either implied or explicit, must be highlighted, questioned and not allowed to be accepted or normal or acceptable behaviour.