Should horrible views get free speech? You would need a definition for what counts as a horrible view (and not a definition by examples).
Usually, "hate speech" is what people want to ban.
The definition of "hate speech" is the following: "abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or SIMILAR GROUNDS:"
If someone says, "Blacks should get killed", that would be deemed hate speech.
If someone said, "Death to poor people" (I'm not saying they are the same thing, but the left supports both groups because they are stereotypically oppressed, and many people would argue a poor (white or else) homeless guy deserves the same right to live as a middle class (white or else) person), that would be viewed as hate speech.
If someone said, "Death to murderers", whether you agreed or not, most people support someone's right to say it (because the murderer harmed someone else to a significant degree; the generic black or poor person did not).
So if the standard is, "If you advocate the death penalty for any harmless or minimally harming group (the poor homeless guy on welfare harms the taxpayer nominally with welfare consumption); then that's hate speech that we would ban you from saying."
If someone said, "I want to cut government spending and if it means poor homeless children of color starve to death, so be it. I'm a fiscal conservative and I prefer my taxes low with dead stranger kids to higher taxes and living stranger kids", if you were logically consistent, you may call advocating for fiscal conservatism hate speech.
If our government decides to censor fiscal conservatism, how would America be any ideologically different from communist China? Death and suffering of the poor are always the cost of economic freedom / low taxes/ low spending / fiscal conservatism / social freedom as well.
Advocating the censorship of those advocating human sacrifice in the name of freedom (even if it's a slight cost of freedom to save a huge number of lives) is communism.
We had that during COVID lockdowns (people were advocating censoring those who wanted a little human sacrifice in exchange for a lot of freedom), and these people are communists. I can respect (and despise) an honest communist; I cannot respect a wishy-washy communist who doesn't realize they are a communist that claims to only want to censor some things they would deem to be hate speech while not realizing the precedent they have set.
Me; I'm a free speech absolutist. You should be allowed to advocate literally any political position you want, whether it's as far right as the KKK or as left-wing as calling for the deaths of all conservatives, even if they are anti Trump republicans (but still agree with Trump on all the policies they deem make Trump a bigot). People should see Liz Cheney the same way as they see Ben Shapiro; they are both anti Trump republicans.
