I'm not sure that folks are 'dug in' about rejecting hydroxychloroquine because of objecting to Trump. (Well, I'm sure that some folks are 'dug in' on both sides because of that specific connection-- but I don't believe that the entire medical and scientific community is in that category.)
This, like much else around Covid 19, does not need to be, and should not be, political. It should be medical.
It's entirely possible for HCL to be reasonably safe, and effective, for it's traditionally prescribed purposes, while still being 'unsafe' and of questionable therapeutic value, in treating Covid 19 patients.
Covid 19 patients are by definition suffering from the comorbidity of Covid 19: It's possible that risk factors of use differ in that population than they do in the general population that might normally be candidates for HCL treatment for other purposes. Like all drugs, there are factors in personal health situations that may recommend against usage, even if there is some potential benefit.
Personally, I think that eventual research may come back to recommending HCL as a viable treatment for a certain specific subset of Covid 19 patients, while recognizing that widespread indiscriminate treatment of Covid patients is a bad idea.
This is not radically different than changing medical views on intubation, immune system suppressants, or other treatments for Covid. Until we have a 'global' direct treatment for Covid (like a vaccine), we're not really treating Covid: we're treating the side effects of a Covid infection-- and those side effects vary from person to person, and through the course of the infection.
Aspirin is also considered safe. There are medical conditions that should advise against it's use in particular patients. People who are on blood thinners, for example, may be advised to avoid aspirin: not because it's not effective in lowering temperatures or reducing muscle aches, but because it's a different risk pool than the general population.