So in 12 % of the elections we did have the minority come to rule by the electoral college - and in those times, Republicans won.

That's a whole other conversation. The U.S. constitution sets us up as a Republic of separately sovereign States that also has a federal government - something that lies between the EU and a traditional parliamentary system nation-state. We've glommed onto that a kind of national election for the chief executive, and it's a kludge. But it's no more "minority rule" than what we saw in the UK, where Labor won a crushing victory with a massive Parliamentary majority but only got 33.7% of the "popular vote." Very few democracies elect a national head of state with direct popular vote - we're just a weird hybrid between a parliamentary system and republican system.

On the matter at hand, although I don't know Lambo's brother, his comment seems to me more a lament that "liberals" are setting policy in the country, even though "liberals" are a small minority in the country. Leaving aside whether the first part is accurate, the second part is actually true. Only about a quarter of the country identifies as liberal. There are far more conservatives than liberals. So it's not all that weird that conservatives sometimes get surprised when liberals are able to obtain their policy goals. I think that conservatives tend to overestimate the degree of power that the liberal faction has within the Democratic party at the federal level, which exacerbates that. But they're not wrong in thinking that liberals are not a majority in the country.