The phrasing of this question is not how the article presents it:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ency-1.3868677 If you think about the question, it leaves the door open for people to not support Trump for many reasons but still consider that his decisions could be beneficial for someone's family. Someone who thinks Trump is an awful person, but the impact on my family will be good because of his approach to pipelines and traditional energy. That would not characterize everyone who chose "positive" as a response, but some people had to think that way and are considered as viewing Trump "favourably" by the article.
This sort of gets to the crux of the whole issue that keeps coming up in threads and relates to DeAngelo though. I think it is totally acceptable to say "let's keep politics out of hockey talk and the work place" when it comes to things like economic policy. Some people are going to favour neoconservative economics and some are going to favour more social spending (I do think that neocon or trickle down approaches are starting to be viewed by many as negative for human rights but it is at least a step or two to get from a system that is supposed to be intended to improve the economy for all to bias or systemic prejudice). As long as someone is not prejudiced or in favour of violating human rights, there really isn't a need for everyone to agree. With Trump though, the prejudice is so thinly-veiled at this point that you can't really just say let's not make this political. If DeAngelo or someone else is presenting themself as a Trump supporter it becomes a human or social issue and not an issue of mere "politics".
I saw posts during the Harper administration where people didn't want to talk about the Conservatives and the Liberals and that seemed fine to me. Even now, if someone doesn't want to talk about Trudeau and his missteps in a thread, that makes sense to me too. If it is something to do with Trump or racism in hockey or systemic racism (yes, the Holtby mask cultural appropriation debate) then it is part of the discussion and that's what the forum is here for.
TL;DR- Some things are relevant to the hockey discussion even though they include larger issues or social issues. Sometimes political parties or policies move beyond the label of "politics" and are relevant to discussion.