General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Without free and open elections a government leader is not legitimate. [View all]sarisataka
(22,713 posts)it must take place in a democracy.
Many people have the mistaken notion that the U.S. is a democracy. At the Federal level we are a republic, not a democracy. The difference is important. It means we can have anomalies where a person can win the overall popular vote yet loose the election due to the distribution of elected representatives.
Similar situations can occur in a Parliamentary system where the head of government may come from a party other than the one with the most representatives. A coalition of minority parties could theoretically usurp the power of a majority party with 49% of the members of Parliament.
It either case, the elections may be "free and fair" but not reflect the choice of the plurality of the people. We can whine about the Electoral college and popular vote but Hillary only received ~48% of cast ballots and that only represents ~20% of the total eligible voters.
Our elections are free and fair- until tampering is proven. Engagement of the voters is a very different issue and we have a mechanism to eliminate the Electoral system if we believe it has become obsolete.
Castro was better than Batista, Mussolini was better than Hitler, Andropov was better than Stalin, what's your point?