Their contemporaries were certainly able to call them such and worse. However, I do not see that we can compare these figures to Clinton and Trump. Neither has the accomplishments or the potential for accomplishments that could compare.
The argument isn't that IF there are similarities between political rhetoric now and in 1800 THEN you may make a comparison between historical figures. It's that IF there are similarities between political rhetoric now and in 1800 THEN similar political problems may have existed in the year 1800 that we are facing today. The author is highlighting his premise, not making a character comparison.
Misunderstanding what the author wrote is not a personal view or opinion, it's just ignoring the facts. Ironically, that "facts as a personal view" argument was heavily used by both candidates in the 2017 election which you have decried.
That is what I was addressing with my previous comments. Sorry if you thought I was challenging your personal/political/emotional views in some way. I think you are correct, you're just using poor argumentation.