I've more or less come to believe that voting - at least on the national scale - doesn't really function the way most like to think - that its some noble expression of the will of the people (even presuming that the will of the people is rational in the first place - more than likely it isn't).
Voting, combined with checks and balances, term limits - is more of a hamster wheel for power seekers. The combination of those things makes power really difficult and costly to attain, transient, and limited (hopefully). And it helps ensure that power transitions peacefully, more or less. Its less about the actual candidate, and more about churn.
Not sure why you're downvoted. I've lived in multiple countries, including a dictatorship and a very corrupt democracy. The dictatorship was definitely preferred to the corrupt democracy - nothing worked in the latter. It was just deadlock after deadlock.
The US isn't as bad as that very corrupt democracy, but I do not share many people's views that when a country switches to democracy things will improve. There are far too many factors in play, and people voting is only a small factor amongst all of them. The culture of the people probably matters a lot more than whether they get to vote or not.
However, it seems to me that it keeps _individuals_ churning through the powerful offices of state yet ensures that those individuals are only only drawn from a particular _restricted group_.
That's the reason for the animosity to Trump. Within that restricted group he wields more power with fewer ties than other group members.
If he were one of the usual oligarchs who has to compromise with the investment banks and lobbyists for powerful special interests he would be more controllable. But who knows what someone with their own resources might get up to.
Voting, combined with checks and balances, term limits - is more of a hamster wheel for power seekers. The combination of those things makes power really difficult and costly to attain, transient, and limited (hopefully). And it helps ensure that power transitions peacefully, more or less. Its less about the actual candidate, and more about churn.