[ansel12]

While negotiating with the Soviet Union, U.S. administrations of all stripes felt certain of the moral superiority of their political system over the Soviet one. They felt they were speaking in the name of their people and the free world as a whole, while the leaders of the Soviet regime could speak for no one but themselves and the declining number of true believers still loyal to their ideology.

But in today’s postmodern world, when asserting the superiority of liberal democracy over other regimes seems like the quaint relic of a colonialist past, even the United States appears to have lost the courage of its convictions.

It's true, when we dealt with Russia, it was always intense, deep, substantive, and the media treated it as so, and that includes the varying levels and successes of various presidents, the constant was that our efforts to deal with Russia were always treated as important and top news.
But now.....

I don't have TV so I'm not confident in my observations about what people are learning about Iran and current threats, including Russia, but I get the impression that they are barely covered as strategic threats.

How can the voters know who to vote against, and who to vote for? We don't even know that we have enemies, and much less, that they have names and a location on maps, and are countries.

[CitizenUSA]

Iran? Who cares. Look! There’s the Scooby Doo van!!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3042448/Scooby-limps-Iowa-Secret-Service-parked-Hillary-Clinton-s-van-HANDICAPPED-spot-huddled-Democratic-leaders-high-stakes-meeting.html

[Verginius Rufus]

During the Cold War we never had a President whose chief advisor (and boss) was born in the USSR. Even Jimmy Carter had a national security advisor who was Polish and therefore inclined to be wary of the Soviets, even if Jimmy’s instincts were to appease the Soviets, at least until they invaded Afghanistan.