It's not a question about being silly. It's a question about retaining the legitimacy to persuade people in the middle, people that are currently nominal Trump supporters.
What should scare you the most isn't Trump; it should be the credulity of the electorate, its tolerance of his rhetoric, and its faith in his vague promises. Trump's rhetoric has only _softened_ over the course of the past year. Not too long ago he was literally criticizing John McCain for being captured.
People in dictatorial regimes didn't get there by being quiet. They never were. Even today in places like Venezuela and Russia people take to the streets. They got there by losing a channel of communication to their fellow citizens.
It's no coincidence that Trump's rhetoric is typically vague and non-specific. The whole Muslim registry thing, for example, was vague enough that many people could rationalize it away; that's even easier now that Trump has come out against it.
People are just going to waste their bullets by shooting at poorly defined, moving targets. And when you finally get something lined up in your sites and have a good shot, nobody is going to notice. Trump clearly enjoys tweaking the opposition this way, he understands that his audience enjoys it. Trump understands how and when to hold and distract their attention--it's second nature to him because he thrives on that attention.
All the Republican nomination competitors made the same mistake... and lost. Hillary Clinton made the same mistake... and lost. Pointing out the obvious flaws in his policies, the impossibility of his promises, and his rejection of core American ideals DID NOT WORK! The moment those tactics find any purchase, he changes his tune accordingly.
Too many people _want_ to believe; too many people are reveling in a sense of rebellion, insensitive to consequences. The only way to get through to them is to give them a front-row seat to each and every policy failure, along with an accompanying narrative that squarely lays the blame at his feet.
In the interstitial time between consequential events, people (especially journalists) should just focus on maintaining transparency, so that the record cannot be easily denied. Doing that requires not providing fodder that allows the administration to sow uncertainty and doubt about opposition criticisms.
If people keep reacting to every aspect of Trump's rhetoric, there won't be anybody in the audience left. They'll have all gone home, either secure in their faith in Trump's promises or given over to apathy. Just like people are in Venezuela, Russia, and elsewhere.
It's not about standing up to Trump. This is a democracy. The only way to win is by persuading his supporters, especially when it's this early in the game and Trump and his growing band of sycophants haven't secured much institutional power.