As Countable member "wsdraperv" said:
"We are NOT a democracy, thank God. We are a representative republic. Get over it. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting over what's for lunch. It's a rough outcome for the sheep every time."
I also like Countable member Tucker's opinion:
"Democracy is tyranny of the majority - 51% of the population can force its will on the other 49%. Being a republic does a better job of protecting the individual from the majority (not a perfect job, but a better job) by giving them outsized voice relative to their number. That's not a bug, it's precisely the point. Being a republic means that a candidate must win coalitions of different types of people (the proxy for which is winning different states), rather than enough of one kind to rule out all others. Now I ask the pro-direct-democracy folks: what is so magical about a majority? If there are 4 Nazis and 3 Jews in a group, why should the number determine who gets power? It shouldn't. If the population of pro-slavery states outnumbers the population of anti-slavery states, should the pro-slavery states be able to determine policy? No? Well good. The reason they couldn't was because of the electoral college and more specifically because of the Senate, the portion of government where representation is unrelated to population. There's nothing inherently moral about being a greater number. The Constitution sets up checks and balances between those given power to prevent any potential tyrants from collecting too much of that power, and the electoral college is a check on the power of a tyrannical majority."