It works better when you have an idea of what the President actually does and what direct action would mean.

Almost everything we would want to do is at the local or regional level. Want higher density housing? Your mayor and city council control that with no say from the President. Better public transportation? Same, though the President can try convincing Congress to pass grant funding for it. More and better bike lanes? Same thing. Get rid of anti-homeless architecture? All city level stuff.

School lunch programs? State government can stop it if the wrong people are there. Expand Medicare? Same. Better rail networks? Same. Ban gay conversion therapy? All state government.

Foreign policy is the one thing where the President does have a lot of control. That's actually the exception. I like Biden's approach on Ukraine--getting most of Europe to go along with sanctions at all, especially after Trump destroyed our soft diplomatic power, was amazing. His approach on the Gaza conflict is far less amazing, to put it mildly. Other than foreign policy, the position is mostly advocacy and horse trading around funding priorities with Congress. Soft power for the most part.

A bad President, especially combined with a bad Congress, sure as hell can stop the local agenda items, though. Pull the grants for cities to implement public transit. Pull Medicare expansion entirely. Don't provide school lunch program funding at all. Put judges in power who rule arbitrarily in favor of conservatives with no care for precedent.

What voting for Biden is for is to make sure the federal government doesn't overrule things built locally and regionally. That's it. The rest needs direct action on the part of all of us at different levels of government.