> Democracy = elect whoever the people actually want to elect, even if you don't like their choice.

That rather rules out what happens in, say, the USofA, where entrenched party politics limits the choice of the wider population to those few candidates that are backed.

> Some people reapply that definition to the word "populism". No, it's real democracy to elect the people's choice.

Populism isn't democracy, democracy isn't populism; it's generally used to describe a cynical political strategy of appeal to the broadest, lowest common denominator instincts, to gain support from a base who at best get little more than lip service toward addressing their real needs. Frequently associated with strawmen and strawissues as a focus of common manufacted enemy, etc.

> > Democracy = elect whoever the people actually want to elect, even if you don't like their choice. That rather rules out what happens in, say, the USofA, where entrenched party politics limits the choice of the wider population to those few candidates that are backed.

It’s also weird in that the candidate with the most votes might not win. The electoral system is weird.

Agreed on all points. The USofA is very far from true democracy. For starters, the NGO networks and a lot of unelected bureaucracy are the real government authority by quite a margin -- all of whom are directly opposed to and working against the US Constitution.