Nintendo can clearly advertise the technical jump of the platform then. I think consumers can figure out that the Switch is too weak to run a lot of multiplatform games.The consumers even interested in those games in the first place are savy enough to see Doom or Witcher III running on Switch and realize that this is the limit of what the system can offer. Its not like every third party game suddenly becomes exclusive so they can sell "Pros", if you can run your game on the Switch models with 60 million install base, your going to do it. Daemon X Machina 2 isn't suddenly going to be a Switch Pro exclusive. I don't think the line of why a game is or isn't exclusive to the more powerful hardware is going to be any more murky than Switch lite. In fact, there are plenty of games "incompatable" with Switch Lite that at first glance seem like they could be compatible (super mario party, for instance)
As for your first point, imagine saying, "well we could try to get A version of Resident Evil 3 on Switch Pro, but people who own a Switch are going to be insulted that a game clearly designed for more powerful systems isn't available on a weaker system so we won't release it because who needs money?". Say that it barely costs anything compared to porting to Switch to port to Switch Pro (that is, if Switch is as developer friendly as its made out to be, then the barrier to development has been its specs, not the APIs and the system itself). Then, if it costs almost nothing to port the game, why would a third party say no to free install base, especially install base likely to be over 20 million if new 3DS is anything to go by. Third parties arent going to care if a select number of people arent insulted by them not releasing on base Switch, if they could release it on Switch, thats even more install base, they absolutely would, but they aren't.
Also, why should Nintendo even humor people who feel "insulted" by this? That would be like saying every 3DS game should also be on DS, because clearly the 3D isnt the reason those games are on 3DS, and DS consumers are going to be insulted they have to upgrade. Now of course, that's not exactly one to one to this situation, 3DS was a new system, Switch "Pro" is an upgrade. But with that said, 3DS was an entire library of new games solely made for 3DS, Switch Pro is going to be a much smaller library of select multi platform titles. That seems like much less of an issue than the prior example, so I don't see why Nintendo would suddenly care about it. If Nintendo was targeting Switch Pro for a new Fire Emblem game, yeah, I'd be a Switch "Pro" owner and I'd be a bit peeved. But I don't see them doing that for any good reason, so I don't think thats a problem. If Switch consumers feel like they have to upgrade to get games that were never going to be on the Switch in the first place, thats their issue. If Nintendo doesn't make a Switch Pro, Switch users would still need to buy another platform to play those games, and that platform would have no compatibility with their current Switch ecosystem or even more importantly, any portability. So nothing would change, for the worse, with a Switch "Pro". The consumers that can't figure that out are going to struggle just as much 3.5 years from now when Nintendo launches a new system.