[partiallypro]

But in order to be a democracy, do you not need the ability for everyone to freely express their political positions as to win over more political allies? If one party controlled all speech then voted that the opposition no longer had any free speech...they would control the entire national conversation. Hardly democratic. North Korea labels itself a "democracy" and holds elections, but no sane person actually believes that claim. The act of voting itself is only one piece of democracy.

[laughinghan]

To be clear, I strongly support free speech rights for many reasons, one of which is that I agree with you that they make for a better democracy and better society.

But you're being reductive. Of course the act of voting itself is meaningless if state doesn't vest power in it, but countries around the world suppress speech to varying degrees yet are stable, not in any immediate danger of turning into North Korea, and vest enough legitimacy in their elections as to be widely considered democracies, if illiberal ones. Many European countries have notably less freedom of speech in specific areas than the US but are even still widely considered liberal democracies (praising Nazism is illegal in Germany; UK defamation laws impose some of the highest burden of proof on the defendant in the Western world).