Sure.

Majority of who, exactly? Where is the boundary of the dēmos from whence the word "democracy" comes?

Is it even constant for all things, or should powers of self derermination shift as group sizes change: what power should the people of California and New York have to tell the people of Texas that there are decisions they cannot make? What power should the USA have to tell Russia or Ukraine what to do?

Because the US is a minority of the world. So is the EU. So is China, despite being larger than both combined.

Half the world lives within 3300 km of Mong Khet, Myanmar; should they determine all world rules down to planning permission, or just global matters such as mandatory climate change reaponses and enforcing global treaties?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeriepieris_circle

This is the closest I've seen to hate speech without being outright hate speech.

>Allowing minorities to define the agenda, no matter how glamorous it seems, is the path for disaster . It's a really good thing every civil movement, including the civil war itself, disagrees with you. No progressive movement ever suddenly started with a bunch of people changing their mind on a dime withno infuence from the "minorities" first.

Of course, majority is not very cleanly applicable yous politics. Less than half (which according to Mirriam Webster is the definition) of the votes cast in the last election went to Trump/Vance, and with such a poor voter turnout it was even further from a majority. Meanwhile the electoral college is working against the idea.