Same. He will have tour managers, publicity people, HR etc who are paid very well to organise these huge events. At no point did they do basic background checks on the supporting artists and think 'hang on, this guy has a history of politicising his own gigs, lets draw up a contract to make clear that he can't do that if he wants to be attached to this one?'
I don't understand why some causes and issues become cultural touchstones to the point where it's de rig for literally every single celebrity to have to comment on it, no matter how uninformed or unoriginal their view, while others go completely unremarked.
I don't have strong feelings one way or another for ES, but he was between a rock and a hard place here. He didn't have any contract with Macklemore, the promoters did, so HE didn't sack him. His only option was to say 'if you don't let him play, then I'm not playing either,' in which case he could probably be sued for tens, even hundreds of millions, and let down all the fans who, let's face it, have all come to see HIM, not Macklemore, or any of the other supporting artists, many of whom would lose out financially to the tune of hundreds of dollars (even if they got their actual tickets refunded) in non-refundable travel and accommodation costs.
Not to pull on the heart strings or anything but he will be well aware that, like with any very popular artist with mass appeal, particularly among younger people, there will be kids with tickets to his concert who are seriously ill, who have gone through hugely distressing life events or whose parents have scraped together every last penny to afford to see him - to refuse to play those shows just because a different artist decided to take advantage of ES's larger fanbase to air his political views would be wrong, imo.