>Bill Gates is no longer at Microsoft. Neither of the Cheneys hold any political office.

Yes, certainly lobbying and policy advocacy don't exist, so there's no actual way to be involved in politics other than holding public office and voting.

>None of this wishy washy treatment that Israel, a U.S ally has received from the current administration.

Providing the bulk of weaponry and auxiliary infrastructure to a country actively engaged in a conflict whilst offering full-throated moral support is 'wishy washy' now.

What is it that you are endorsing? More funding for Israel?

The support or wishy washyness still amounts to funding the military action that is killing thousands and thousands of civilians.

What more do you want? Even More funding and public forced support of this clear massacre?

What did Trump do to hold Israel accountable between 2016 and 2020?

Trump couldn't do anything because he was being held at a deep state black site. The person you saw in the Oval Office was a body double hired off the dark web, who was deliberately making bad decisions to ruin Trump's good reputation and steal the election, probably.

You are telling it like some kind of joke but both Trump and Obama were publicly castrated in office. The power of the president seems greatly exaggerated.

I think that, at least in part, this meme is how parties excuse their inability to deliver once they secure power. In Obama's case specifically, I don't know how a guy who had been a community organizer since the 80s, who'd been a senator since the late 90s was so caught off guard by the legislature once he had executive power at his disposal.

True. I think the problem might be that I don't have any possibility to differ between a "I want to" and "I can do".

Politicans talk like that they are the same. Probably since pretending there is consent tips the scale in a lot of cases.

But it makes the rest of us that donmt do full time political analysis confused.

But yet they both did actually do a bunch of other things, especially exercising the power of the bully pulpit.

Or alternatively if we do take it for granted that presidents are quite constrained in what they themself can do (aka "separation of powers"), then why is the original comment talking as if there would be some massive sea change next time when there wasn't one last time?

This seems like another bit of Schrödinger's Trump. Like how he's both the most powerful most successful person, and also just an unfortunate victim that other people are always doing mean things to.