Just speaking for myself --
Trump said many things that many consider deserved to be said, some construe them to be racist because that is what they wanted to see, yet his statements were based on his observations, not necessarily how he thought his statements would impact the feelings of his detractors at the time, or later. Of course, he also said some things that would have been better left unsaid, no argument there. Nobody is purporting that Trump is 'politically correct', a great philosopher, orator, social genius, etc.
Yes, there are some who take what was said out of its intended context and/or twist what was said to serve their own agenda. This will always happen. The media got stuck on their perceived offensiveness of some words without delving into the background thoughts, the how and why of the statements, the media was overly concerned with assisting Trump's opposition. Those who related to Trump's statements, as well as those those offended by them, were poorly served by so-called journalists.
Trump did not unleash the 'evil of racism and bigotry'. Those factors have always been out there, and are mostly overblown by media attention or focus, with multiplier effects caused by the modern influence of information speed and circulation, along with the distractions of biased sources.
There is no 'fixation on slavery' other than by those who, multiple generations removed, seek to achieve preferential treatment, financial gain, or social favors by portraying themselves as modern victims of past social injustice.
The vast majority of our nation is made up of decendants of immigrants, people who left their homelands for various reasons, who came to America, became a part of American culture, and made America great. It is apparently not 'politically correct' to expect more modern immigrants to melt into the fold. Over time, our nation, similar to many other nations, has deemed it necessary to formulate rules for immigration and eventual citizenship. Yes, there are exceptions to every rule, yet over the past couple of decades, to many Americans, the exceptions have become overwhelming, so much so that there are clear examples of a perceived need to limit or control the actions of 'sanctuary', achieve some societal balance between 'sanctuary' and safety, etc. While many might not agree on those perceptions, nor the extent of the perceived problem, the many who do experience those perceptions do not deserve to have their voices muzzled.
Time will tell whether or not this has been or is a big 'con'. It is not very predictable.
As for the 'majority of voters' issue -- one candidate might have had more actual popular votes than the other, yet neither candidate had over 50%, and there was obviously no clear 'mandate' for either side. The voters cast their ballots, the electoral system worked the way it was intended. The President-elect is not yet the President, promises have not yet actually been kept nor broken.
