Is it normal to have this problem with democracy?

"The biggest problem with democracy is that popular opinion always gets voted for. Life would be much easier if I was supreme ruler so I could simply demand acceptance of my unpopular ideas."

Churchill said it well: "the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with one of its voters." But, then again, he also said "democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

It's by no means perfect but it's sure as hell better than a dictatorship.

As long as people disagree on things, this is a problem that will never be completely resolved. There is at best a partial solution, which is getting people to first agree on broad ideals ensuring any policies are consistent with those.

Like in the US, we have the constitution, especially the bill of rights. It could be changed if enough people wanted to, but for the part, everyone agree that it's good stuff. It helps keep people fair and honest. For instance say the majority wants to ban erotic papaya fiction. There's only handful of guys into that so they'd be screwed (and I don't mean in a hot fruity way). But they can point to the 1st Amendment and say what about THIS huh? And then the majority shuffles their feet and says "Aw geez you mean that applies to you weirdos too?". But they can't think of a good reason why not, so the papaya fans win the day.

I can't think of a specific example with a small scale group, but the same principles should apply.

There are a lot of different systems of democratic election around the world, and some of them do represent minority views. The systems in the United States, Canada and in the UK (and a lot of other countries too, I imagine) are variants of the "First Past the Post" system. Under FPTP, minority views are only represented if they can win a seat in national Congress or Parliament on a local level. To win representation, supporters of a party have to be all gathered in one constituency place for their candidate to win a seat and their voice to be heard. In the United States the Libertarian Party generally receives about 1 million votes in elections for the House of Representatives, but a Libertarian Party candidate has never sat in Congress.

There are other democratic systems in other parts of the world, which value "proportional representation" rather than majority. In many of these systems, candidates are not tied to constituencies but are selected based on the proportion of the votes their whole party receives. If a party gets 10% of the vote, they would get 10% of the seats Congress. I think this type of system is the best: http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/?PageID=483

That said, no electoral system can change the fact that the President can only represent one party, and only needs to appeal to 50% of the voting population to get elected. I'm not really sure how democracy to get around that problem aside from abolishing Presidents and Prime Ministers.

The problem with democracy is representatives of the people, they make the decisions and they are bought by corporations.

Democracies have one excellent quality. They accomplish nothing when nobody agrees to anything. Doing nothing is far better than doing everything.

You could live an alternative lifestyle.

You could always leave the party like I did, but if you agree with the overall principals, you might not want to.

I'm sorry to say, but I think the chances of having a democrat candidate in this country that doesn't share the views of the party's modern incarnation would be eaten alive. :( The democrat party is pretty damn conservative but they, of course, are leaning to the far left with it.

About having the unpopular opinion? I usually keep my beliefs to myself. I am especially iffy about talking politics with people. Some people can act very immaturely when they discover that *gasp* you don't see eye to eye!

If you were a candidate, I would have more respect for you of you were to stick by your beliefs and to be open with them.

Democracy is good if applied correctly. That way we can get rid of hipsters becoming a deciding voice in our society. Hipsters are a symbol of rebellion and the last thing we need is chaos and confusion in this world.