They were saying it in the context of fighting off the oppression of a monarchy. I think you are twisting it. The threat of abuse of power was in the individuals holding office. They restrained the office in order to restrain the officeholders. That was the whole point. They did not want super powerful elites. They wanted a constitutional republic that belonged to the people, not the officeholder.
The choice for us should not be between powerful and weak. It should be between wise and unwise, constitutional and unconstitutional. There are attributes to consider, but being a devouring lion is not one we should admire or seek.
“In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate, look to his character. The scriptures teach that rulers should be men who rule in the fear of God, able men, men of truth, hating covetousness. It is to the neglect of this rule that we must ascribe the multified frauds, breaches of trust, and embezzlement of public property which tarnish the character of our country and disgrace government. When a citizen gives his vote to a man of known immorality, he abuses his civic responsibility, he sacrifices not only his interest, but that of his neighbor; he betrays the interest of his country.” Noah Webster, 1823
Trump has lots of power, but it's been earned. You can say he's been paid too much or too little ... he has offered his wares in the free marketplace and people have willingly handed them their money.
He's actually the only one up their who's come about his power with the proposition "first I provide value, then you reward me, if you choose to accept what I offer", rather than the other way around. It's persuasive rather than coercive. It's COERCIVE power that the framers sought to stem through limiting the use of the powers of an office.
So there seems to be a notion that he would abuse his power. And yet there is very little evidence in his of life of him abusing it, and then still, he's the only one who doesn't have it granted to him because there are guns backing it up if you don't comply.
We're not going to have a power problem with Trump. His power has been acquired via persuasion and offering a product first, not as a result of promises and then at the point of a gun.
That's why Mussolini didn't understand the quote. He wasn't a lion, he was a mouse with a gun.
Lion's are good, and WHEN they are serving in the government, they should wear a harness to keep them from mankind's tendency to misuse the monopoly on the use of force. Trump will be on a super short leash when elected. If he can't persuade people to voluntarily follow him, he'll throw no executive order hissy fit like Obama, he'll just be ineffective.
Basically, I am saying that you probably have to worry less about Trump than any politician - any of them.