[PrimeMcFly]

No, there is no gap. You're making a rather large assumption.

And the US is both a representative democracy (no need for scarequotes) and a representative republic.

I used 'representative democracy' (quotes actually make sense here) because the context was about how well democracy as a form of government works.

This[0] helpful wiki page may be of interest to you.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy

[jki275]

I'm not the slightest bit interested in what Wikipedia has to say about it.

The US is a republic. Calling it a democracy is done by people who want a different form of government where the majority rules and can remove the rights of the minority.

[PrimeMcFly]

So you're denying/rejecting an authoritative source because it doesn't match your own ideas and preconceptions.

Got it.

[jki275]

Wikipedia has literally never been an authority on anything.

Its use as a source is specifically banned in every academic institution I've attended over my entire adult life.

[PrimeMcFly]

Wikipedia is an authoritative source of information, has been repeatedly tested and examined for accuracy, and is cited by experts often.

Yes, it's banned in universities, but that's largely as a holdover from when anyone could edit it. Wikipedia is repeatedly tested to be more accurate than Britannica, which has never been banned.

It doesn't matter anyway, as Encyclopedia articles are summaries, and the actual sources can be referenced.

In this case, the article is correct, explains why it is correct, and certainly trumps your baseless assertion.