Simple answer: No.

In many states in many times dictatorships had been the answer to great troubles and problems which needed a swift solution and a strong hand. The national socialists though were not followers of Hitler because of the idea, that the great tasks of their time needed a strong man solving them; in their political view, every state in every time needs a strong hand, leading figures. This was called the "Führerprinzip". Hitler as head of state was bound to lead the whole state. This whole concept was not tailored especially for Hitler. It was a pyramidical approach. Every organization, every area of life needed leaders, who were overviewed by their leaders all up to Hitler. Hitler was meant to be the head, leading every aspect of Germany by having inferiors with unconditional loyalty and obedience. Every leader has the total power over the area he is meant to lead, only accountable to his superior. Therefore Hitler as Führer of the German people was meant to be in total charge, deciding every aspect of society and political life through own decision or by delegation.

Democracy therefore was nonsense in the eyes of national socialists. The superior was to appoint the inferior since he was a tool to his means, the will of the people manifested in the fatherly figure of the Führer Adolf Hitler, whose whole existence was based on him deciding and leading for the good of the German people.