Being able to do what you want, so long as you “kiss the ring” has unfortunately been a reliable path to temporary and virtueless power
Unless the non-activist citizen votes to give their power to the most virtuous, they generally default to giving away power to someone they believe will ultimately give them priority with the least amount of impact to their core personality trait
Trump’s authoritarianism appeals to people who feel that he can control the various unelected people they feel have too much power over their lives and society: career bureaucrats, corporate HE, NGOs, universities, etc.
Remember the 2017 “Resistance” against Trump? https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/resistance-from-with....
This revealed that no matter which party wins the election, the fourth branch of government is staffed and run by Democrats. All the three letter agencies are staffed by 95% Democrats. And people think that Trump can bring them to heel.
[Citation Needed]
Hypothetical: Trump is campaigning on immigration. Say he wins the election and issues an executive order to deport every single illegal immigrant. What should happen, in a democracy?
"People" generally don't have the expertise to run things in a complex modern world. Bureaucrats and lawyers aren't always better, but pace Damon Runyon (quoting sportswriter Hugh Keough), that's the way to bet. [0]
"Democracy" in a complex modern world means that "people" periodically get an opportunity to toss out the bureaucrats and lawyers — because ballots are better than bullets.
[0] "The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet." https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/06/04/race-swift/#google_...
I don't believe that congress is doing a good job representing the people but I don't think that the solution to that is to elect a king.
