No person with common sense and basic knowledge of firearms would consider ANY AR in ANY caliber an assault rifle.
First, consider that military rifles used for assault tactics today have the ability to fire multiple rounds with a single pull of the trigger (i.e., supports burst or fully automatic fire). No commercially sold ARs support that ability, nor can they legally be modified to do so, nor would such modification easily performed except by an experienced gunsmith with components that are not readily available.
Second, consider that "assault" is an adjective that describes how the rifle is being used and by definition a "hunting" rifle (keyword "hunting") is not being purchased or used for assaulting.
Of course, I should also mention that the .300 BLK caliber was not invented for the purposes of hunting. It was invented to as a military rifle caliber that provided superior ballistics to the 7.62x39mm in supersonic loads AND could used effectively in suppressed PDWs using subsonic loads. It doesn't matter why it was invented by how it is being used. Many common calibers, such as the .30-06 Springfield, where first invented for military firearms, but have found common use for recreational and hunting activities; and many rifle designs have been being exchanged between civilian and military uses for over 200 years. The American Long Rifles used to good effect in the revolutionary Battles of Saratoga were civilian rifles owned by their marksman shooters.
When it comes down it, don't believe the labels that are applied to things simply elicit an emotional response and motivate a political action.