Unfortunately, since the US has become the single global power, their form of miserable democracy has become the standard that is normally implemented wherever we now see democratization.

The hallmark of US democracy is the direct election of the chief of government, who then concentrates a huge amount of power in his hands for the next 4 years.

However, in this form of democracy, elections typically degenerate into a popularity contest between the leading candidates. No wonder that show biz personalities sometimes have an edge.

Furthermore, the system favors populists (who play emotional tones) over responsibility-driven characters (who concern themselves with the real issues).

I call the US system of direct democracy miserable because it generally produces worse results than an indirect system would.

An indirect system of democracy would mean: people elect their representatives, and these representatives elect the chief of government and other officials who wield power.

Unfortunately, whether in the US or anywhere else, the electorates, on average, are not very knowledgeable of the issues at stake, and actually, electorates in general are not intelligent. Typically, you have a large number of stupid people electing candidates who can best relate to stupid people.

This is the case more so in the Third World than in the Old World and the New World, as in the Third World, electorates are typically composed of a large number of uneducated, and sometimes illiterate people. Often, in direct elections for major government positions, they vote along the lines they best understand. And these are ethnic and religious lines. Or they vote for candidates who can best address their envy or hate (as it is much easier to unite a large number of people against a perceived common enemy, rather than behind a constructive agenda).

When this happens, you typically see ethnic and religious fragmentation in Third World countries, as well as a lot of policies that are not in the genuine interest of the people.

The alternative route of an indirect, representative system can avoid many of the pitfalls of the direct system. If you have villages or neighborhoods elect representatives among their midst, these are likely people of a good education with a track record of consensus building. If these representatives of neighborhoods and villages then elect a representative among themselves, you again get a group of representatives who have an even better track record of consensus building. And they should be the ones who elect a country's president (and who should be able to impeach him).