this whole “it’s because of [behavior x] like yours that Trump won” rhetoric actually goes back a little. It follows a pattern of other similar conservative rhetoric. The most recent in my memory happened mid-campaign cycle, maybe early October? It went like this:
A: Well this recent incident is very shameful because it’s not a democratic procedure.. blabla..
B: America is not a Democracy!
B: America is not a Democracy, dumbass. It’s a republic.
The funny thing is that stating that the U.S. is a representative republic doesn’t refute the original argument being made. It does go just a tiny bit further into detail about government types and is a splashy way of appearing to break your opponent’s argument, (because “the U.S. state is a democracy” is easy to sell rhetoric) when in reality there’s no substance beyond the initial shock factor.
I think there’s some similitude – maybe a simplified version? To the now classic conservative framework of first refuting the point by choosing words that anger progressives so much that leave them stupefied, but that at the same time energize the base, then moving to frame the issue as originally planned.