I think what's missing from your analysis, tack, is that different sides have legitimate and real interests which may or may not be served by tolerance. If you just pursue tolerance for its own sake, independent of these concerns, then you likely do so in error. In another thread, I asked the question as to whether the polarization in American politics can be reversed, and noted various things contributing to that polarization. This includes the perception that letting the other side win may contribute to very real harms. One simply cannot "give-in" to the other in the face of such. Tolerance is at bottom a mechanism that is used for shaping behavior. Sometimes intolerance may be justified in the service of a greater good. If your position is not unconditionally in favor of tolerance, then I apologize for what is something of a straw man, but I haven't seen a lot of balance in your discussion of tolerance.
Anyway, doing my best to stay out of this, so take it for what it's worth.
Anyway, doing my best to stay out of this, so take it for what it's worth.