The part in red is not the problem. The problem is that in delegate staking, control can be owned by someone who has a plurality of the vote. Not "majority of LISK" or "majority of vote", but mere plurality of the vote.
That is a serious point. Do you know why hostile takeovers became a "thing"? Because it was all-but impossible to dislodge management through a proxy fight. Ben Graham himself noted this phenomenon, which he ascribed to ordinary shareholders being "supine."
Scoff at this fellow if you want, but he does know a thing or two about politics and how votes play out in the real world.
If you're interested, a fellow called landomata came up with a fix for his Nxttycoin. Every vote he runs on the Nxt system, he has a lottery. Each voter gets a number of "tickets" equal to the number of Nxttycoin that he/she votes. If you don't vote, you get no "tickets." The prize is an amount of Nxttycoin.
By so doing, he incentivizes voting and makes the "mere plurality of the vote" higher than it otherwise would have been. Now this fix is a trust-based hack - Nxttycoin holders have to trust landomata to be neutral and to follow through on his promise - but it is a fix.
EDIT: It looks like a similar fix is going to be added to Lisk:
...How we get more people voting:
We will introduce a "Forging Pool" in the future (as a dapp). Delegates can run them on their nodes and register their delegate account on the sidechain. With this pool the delegates can then distribute a part of their earnings to the voters automatically every X days.
This will create an incentive for users to withdraw funds from the exchanges and vote for trusted individuals. In order to confirm trusted individuals, we will introduce an "Identity Dapp" in the future, in which people can associate their account with an username, real name, social media profiles, photo, and much more.
More information about all this will follow before we launch.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1346646.msg14184427#msg14184427