Citizens of states are too often disappointed with their leaders. Plain question would be why is that, or in other words where lies the cause of their disappointment? For those who care, Çrémad-Bhägavatam gives plain and simple understanding in many places. One of such explanations, how would the citizens be satisfied, rather than not, with their leader, is in 4.16.15, "This King will please everyone by his practical activities, and all of his citizens will remain very satisfied. Because of this the citizens will take great satisfaction in accepting him as their ruling king." Very opposite to what we experience today, though existing reality. Çréla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura gives to an adorable leader socially humane touch. "Because the world will be pleased by his activities, which please the mind (mano-raïjanakaiù), they will call him king. The word räjaù (king) is derived in two ways. Some say that räjaù is derived from räjayati (one who shines). Here it is said that word räjaù comes from raïjayati (one who attracts, or one who gladdens.)"
If the present day leaders would be trained in such a way so to fulfill this simple requirement for governing, the world will be more enjoyable place. However, the training is not asked for. Rather the depressive machinery of mechanistic democratic elections are in practice bringing no joy and no practicality to societies. In such case there is no use for citizens to gripe, because they prefer the wrong.