Similarities of French and American election promises

I understand the realities of compromise in politics. But I feel some people are still surprised when their elected candidate conceeds or schemes with the opposition.
For example, the EU decisions do not depend on one country. Mr Sarkozy had to negotiate with a many different countries, with different economic goal and a variety of other priorities. For the French populice to believe Mr Hollande will simply arrive at the soonest summit and have his countries demands met first is unrealistic.

Really? Because every other country is expecting the exact same thing from their newly elected candidate. So the best any one individual can do, and this is in any multi-party representative government mind you, is make policy closely resembling what their constituents want with the fewest concessions to the opponents.

Think Hungry-Hungry Hippo on an international level. Except instead of tiny plastic balls, they are grabbing political clout and policy.

And the candidates play into it, promising to raise taxes on the wealthy to 75% (Hollande) or dismantle social healthcare benefits (Mitt Romney, US presidential candidate). So we the voters place our bets on the dream, thinking if we get enough support the candidate of our choice will be able to meet his promises.
The reality is he or she is just another hippo grabbing at the same amount of pellets. Who are you sending in? And what do you expect them to grab?

These Financial Times

If you are wondering what exactly Congress is going to do with this "bailout plan" for mortgages, Reuters has a easily readable factbox that was very helpful.

A few months ago when I was reading news of the government helping mortgage firms, I thought, "ok, no big deal." But as the issues and facts surfaced I realized how crazily complex it was. It seems media assumes the public knows how the gears of financial buyouts work. The more I read, I concluded that taxpayers have no obligation to save these firms. We're getting a rough deal here. Why am I responsible for the bad decisions of a few greedy wall street execs? Why?

Consequences

Dear, Government
Why do you treat me so? I feel this relationship is no longer working. Our communication is gone. You no longer listen to me. Do you no longer care? Please, talk to me, tell me why you do these things?
I would love to go back to good times, but I'm afraid over the past 6 years you have been unfaithful to my heart. I cannot look at you the same way. You have lost my respect and my love.
Goodbye old friend.

Where do we want to go?

A fear struck me as I read Joe Klein's newest essay in Time, and I thought, "Holy Lord! He is right!" The reality of our political future struck me: As a nation we always want our ideal self -- what we think our lives should be, not where they should be headed -- and thinking irrationally like that will give us time and time again the same results. The past.

I understand all individuals who vote want change. But, any look beyond the thin superficial surface can see that the change americans want is toward better times. Unfortunately, for most of us, that means the past, or some vision of the american past.

Mr. Klein makes several references to "small town america" and how Mrs. Palin represents this. When any empirical research shows there is no more small town america. It does not exist. We are suburban. We live in cities. Sure, many of us would like to believe we live in small towns, but we don't.

Who is Mrs. Palin talking to? An america that only exists in the past. An america that only exists in our heads.