Why is governing so difficult?

Governing is not easy. So what is the problem? Many interpret the difficulty as one which lacks sufficient and efficient programs which would benefit the populace. But, what happens sometimes is not the inadequacy of programs or the lack of sincere intentions by those at the Top. Of course, the Top will always spell-out and campaign on their suggested programs or policies. To some that constitutes a sufficient effort to carry out the intended programs of the Top. But, oftentimes, even when every effort is made, the so-called implementation does not reach the Many people at the Bottom. Why? The real difficulty kicks in when a program conceived in abstraction (to include everyone intended) remains 'abstract' and fails to achieve concrete results. Too often, the different 'divided' States ( blue and red) do not help the transition from an abstract rendition to a concrete result, one that reaches every individual intended. This is a result of different Party loyalties and different Court interpretations of the intended program. Hence, we call such efforts, "symbolic" or the candidate or Leader, a "symbolic leader". The problem, in such a case, is that the relation between the Top and the Bottom in a Triadic or Three Branch Government, is not a 'real' relation; it remains abstract and is blocked at every step in its transition from abstraction to a 'reality' that 'touches' every intended individual at the Bottom. What is to be done? Unfortunately, democracy 'invites' too much 'obstructionism', and Party differences, the Top 1% ism. The Bottom has voted-in the Top. That should be sufficient to implement the suggested programs. Either we organize the Bottom in a manner that helps the transition from abstract to concrete or we invoke the First Amendment's right to "assemble". Unfortunately, we have to organize to get the right guy or gal in, and we also have to organize to implement 'abstractions' into 'concrete' results.