Since argument ad populi is a fallacy, why is democracy considered a positive thing?

Question

This is not an attack, just meant to stimulate thought. What are yours?

Answer 1

I'd tend to go with Benjamin Franklin on this one. It's a lousy idea, but will have to do until something better comes along.

Answer 2

Nobody would argue that because X got elected, he must be the best person for the job. The argument ad populi fallacy refers to using popularity as evidence for truthfulness.

In general, Democracies hold elections over issues where proof is not possible.

As a trivial example, imagine if three people have to go see the same movie. There are several movies out there, they all want to see a movie, and they must go to see the same one. How should they choose which movie to see? If there is one movie that two of them prefer, what better thing can they do than choose that movie? And what would it mean to say those two are "wrong"?