Just because somebody wears a nametag that says "divisive" doesn't mean, objectively, that that person is the "most divisive." Maybe "most unapologetically divisive" would work, or maybe "called 'most divisive'" would be true, but superficial respectful words (aka "Singing Kumbaya") are no measure of divisive effects.

Hard to imagine anyone more "divisive" policy-wise than Lyndon Johnson. Hard to imagine anyone with more flashpoint "divisiveness" than Nixon. Carter created massive divisiveness while serving as a perfect example of textbook morals, honesty, and Christian values, which led to his landslide loss in the first election since 1932 in which an incumbent was beaten.

I think the labeling of Trump as "divisive" serves as little purpose as criticizing Jerry Springer for being "divisive" on his show. The divisions aren't about Trump or Springer. Those guys are just making a career out of riding the wave better than anybody else.