I agree with the first few posters: the man is an idiot. An educated idiot, but an idiot none the same.
All the facts he musters are true, but the conclusions he draws are nonsense.
The strength of Rome happened before the Caesars, back when the succession of rulers was clear, and followed by all.
When Julius crossed the Rubicon, and destroyed the process of regular succession, it began the decline and fall of the Roman empire.
The strength of America is the rock solid rules for succession, leaving no doubt who's in charge.
Added to that is a constitutional government, with a bill of rights establishing and enumerating the rights of the government and the people. This document is defended by the courts, and ultimately by the people.
The government of the US is unique.
He doesn't see that.
One big change that happens later is the rise of the new Persian Empire under the Sassanid dynasty (3rd century A.D.)...more formidable than the Parthians had been. Rome had to spend a lot of energy fighting the Persians just to hold on to what she had conquered earlier.
The political system had worked until the second century B.C. because the aristocrats competing for the highest offices played by the rules. That broke down in the first century, starting with Sulla's capture of Rome in 88 B.C. Julius Caesar was the fourth Roman commander in 40 years to capture Rome as part of a political struggle with his enemies. After he won the civil war, elections became a farce, but even before he crossed the Rubicon things weren't running very well--a couple of times in the 50s the year started with no officials elected because of the turmoil.