Many countries waste money on expensive elections. Favors go to those who have the money to buy political influence. When a leader is good, honest, and fair, there are often term limits that apply, and she is soon kicked out of office. The best leader is an honest and fair dictator. They look out for the people's best interests and they aren't beholden to trying to please special interests just to win election.
Yes, the Roman idea of dictators is a positive one. Even in ancient Rome, the idea of one person in power, a dictator, had potentiality to be flawed and unjust for the society, but the Romans enacted a series of rules that a dictator must follow. This level of accountability was to ensure that the dictator had the goals of society in mind.
The idea of the Roman dictator was to give an individual absolute power only during emergencies, and then the power would be taken away when the emergency was over.
Julius Caesar started as a dictator in this way. This started the transition of the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire. Slowly the society was groomed into loving the idea of having an emperor rather than a republic.
Even in emergencies government must remain by the people and for the people. In fact it is even more crucial. Otherwise sweet-talking individuals become dictators and exploit the emergency for their own personal gain.
The Roman idea of dictators is not positive. The dictator in ancient Rome was given the full authority to deal with a military emergency or to undertake a specific duty. Although this is better than a complete dictatorship, it still gives too much power to one man. This can crate a situation where there is an abuse of the power.
There were many tyrants in ancient Rome. One example is Tito, who killed more than 100,000 people. Anytime a person has complete authority over people, their worst characteristics are multiplied much more. It is never best for people to live their lives under the oppressive thumb of another. Rome demonstrated that with many dictators.