Yes, but it all depends on where they think the country should be. Typically, it's where ever their campaign financiers and special interest lobbyists tell them to go - which is not in harmony with what most voters think (or don't think). Which is meaningless, anyways, since anything the President wants to do has to go through Congress (and all the Reps and Senators each with their own financiers and lobbyists in turn) which is where initiatives get changed significantly from what was originally intended or founder completely. Voters tend to ignore this, though, when considering President.



No, they don't "deliver". Yes, it's all promises and then they get elected and ignore every single one of them. They have corporate paymasters to satisfy, after all.



I vote for who I consider to be "less bad" than the other. I voted for Obama in 2008, but will likely be voting for Romney this year.



I feel that it's unchanged, but contemporary leadership is under a great deal more scrutiny of their every action by the current media environment so every minor flaw or error is amplified vastly out of proportion with its meaning.