Think of a constitution as guardrails about democracies, the constitution nails a couple of very basic rules down hard and leaves room for interpretation and variation. It's a good principle, the constitution guarantees long term stability and the 'basics', the parliaments/congresses/whatever the local variation is called deal with day-to-day variance.
So 'the people' will want both, depending on whether they have the long or the short term view and those two views can and do contradict at times.
People want the constitution in the way they want to interpret it, and they want judges who believe what they believe. There is no contradiction. It is naive to think of judges as some sort of objective arbiter, they are effectively political appointees sent to push an agenda.
So 'the people' will want both, depending on whether they have the long or the short term view and those two views can and do contradict at times.