[rbehrends]

A liberal democracy is not a tyranny of the majority (aka ochlocracy). Checks and balances exist, inter alia, to protect the minority who didn't vote for the president. (And in this case, possibly a majority.)

Plus, there's the problem of a gradual (or even sudden) erosion of checks and balances when one person has too much power and the distinct possibility that the electorate did not foresee all the long term consequences of getting such a person elected.

Of course, you may also go for Mencken's view that "democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." But that would require a fair amount of cynicism.