No argument just compare these 2 definitions.
re·pub·lic
rəˈpəblik/Submit
noun
a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
archaic
a group with a certain equality between its members.
- de·moc·ra·cy
dəˈmäkrəsē/Submit
noun
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
I can't say it much better than this website does, https://wallbuilders.com/republic-v-democracy/
The idea of a Republic, particularly the U.S. Republic puts law and the constitution above men and was structured in such a way to create everlasting stability. A democracy put the power of law and the constitution in the hands of men, because of this there can never be stability or order. This always leads to collapse. Democracy sounds great, but it is not, men can be manipulated so easily. If anyone is scared of the rich now, just imagine what they could do if they started paying masses to vote a certain way. Or pushing billion dollar agendas to manipulate the vote. This happens now, but it doesn't work as well as it does in Europe, because we are a Republic.
I'll argue from the other spectrum, Brexit. The people voted for Brexit, because they didn't like the mass immigration. But do you think for a second the masses understand the complexity of the trade laws between the UK and the EU? But the masses can potentially make or break their country based on the mass populace.
I prefer the U.S. (a Republic) and think I'll stick with that.