well, you pointed to acts of terrorism (= violence with a political or religious agenda)

Trump is knowingly acting strictly against the interests of the majority of voters and hence inviting acts of resistance of which terrorism is probably the most extreme

What a curveball you throw... so terrorism is born from the government not bending to the majority?

Well I would like your interpretation of Brazil bailout for gun being like over 70% in favor of gun permit, but still the government gone and made it very very hard and impratical for anyone to have a gun.

actio = reactio is what Newton's third law of motion says and what I think happens in politics a lot aswell

so in my opion if there is a weak reaction, then that means the action wasn't very strong either or for your example, that the population might favor the gun permit, but aren't all too sad/mad with what was installed instead

Trump obviously plans very strong actions and those tend to have strong reactions

Well normally in a democracy the person who gets the most votes wins and the person with the least votes loses. So 'flawed' may be a discreet way to call it.

Unless you believe 20 cents of increase in the bus fare is a bigger issue than gun permit.

In Brazil we have had Million people on the street to protest without any incident or violence... but there were protests with less than a hundred people and a lot of rioting... so no, the violent response isn't a direct correletion against the will of majority

This have always been the way in USA and a way to prevent the majority to suffocate others, as the founding fathers said if two wolfes and one lamb voted for dinner the lamb would certainly be eaten. So is that fair? For them no, so they made the system in USA.

Funny enough is how the leftwing always decide that when they don't win there isn't any democracy... but will say Cuba, Venezuela and the like are democratic countries.

but the larger the group that feels rejected or flat out wronged the more chance there is for extreme reactions

I'm curious what left wing you're talking about. The USA doesn't have a left wing. The Democrats aren't left-wing (some of its individual members like Bernie Sanders are though, but they actively worked against him anyway), Clinton isn't left-wing and Obama isn't either. People really need to stop blaming the left wing for everything. Not everyone who is against Trump belongs to the left wing for crying out loud. He's an extremist. And please, what serious politician called Cuba a democracy? You're just making things up it seems. 

Obama and Clinton are right-wing politicians, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. The USA isn't a democracy, it's an oligarchy. 

Could be... yet nowadays we see it more on the very minority groups than on the majorities.

Ok, if you say so.

The growing of the state and excessive regulation that Obama and democrats love so much is what leftwing most like. That and doing social control through their programs.

What serious politician? In USA I don't know (but from what I heard even Trudeau was saying good stuff about Castro). And for your information in Brazil, 2/3 of the parties and politicians act and say like Cuba and Venezuela are democracies and that the presidents there were elected.

Saying good stuff isn't the same as claiming Cuba is a democracy and the topic is about the USA, nobody cares about Brazil, at least not here. 

And more state control isn't something that's typical of left-wing politics anyway. In the USA they've always had a phobia of a government that has too much power, but it's mostly just hysterical fear anyway. In Europe this phobia doesn't really exist, at least not to the extent it does in the USA. Right-wing parties here never argue against things like social healthcare, why would they? It's beneficial to the population. If Obama came to Europe he'd definitely be considered a right-wing politician, and not a left-wing one.