Deletion of Republican reactions to Donald Trump's claims of 2020 election fraud

Comment: my issue with the article is not that it is on a fringe topic, because  does not mandate the deletion of articles, only placing them in context (as I attempted to do by adding a couple of sentences in the lead about Trump's claims being false). My issue is the false dichotomy of "Denounced" or "Supported", a big |BLP issue as we are taking Republicans' comments out of context by pigeonholing them into such categories. For instance, we categorise Ben Sasse as "denouncing" Trump by saying: "If the president's legal team has real evidence, they need to present it immediately". No doubt Sasse chose these words carefully to avoid either supporting or denouncing Trump. {{pb}} Rather, I believe such a topic may be notable—it's not recentism to believe that a U.S. party's reaction to their president engaging in the fascist tactic of falsely denouncing a fair election result will be of historical importance—but it should absolutely not categorise comments in a binary way, instead presenting short quotes or representative samples of reactions from high-profile Republicans. The day-by-day summary section, while a bit unfocused, incomplete and a work in progress, is the better part of the article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE||WP:BLP)

Comment: This article should be reframed as an article about Trump's allegations of voter fraud. Trump's allegations of voter fraud in the election ''is'' a notable topic. Even "fringe" topics or conspiracies can be notable if they have heavy media coverage. However, the listing of Republicans that support or oppose his claims is ''not'' notable and is more  or 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SYN)