The reality is that everyone with half a brain knows the US Empire is done, and the scramble is on for a shot at becoming the next hegemon.
==============
Well Dennis I think that almost no one - at least, almost no one in this neighborhood - believes this to be true.
Full disclosure: I happen to mostly agree based upon my reading of the globalization of tech infrastructures - a development that, I believe, denies the US exclusive use of a very large lever and source of economic vitality.
...
The closest most people come to this point of view is conceding that "relative decline" has occurred - that is, it's obvious the US no longer dominates technologies such as advanced telecom, high performance computing, machine tools, auto manufacturing and so on.
But beyond that, the 11 trillion dollar economy, sprawling arsenal, and still central role (apparently) the US plays in global financial flows causes people to step back from agreeing with your position beyond its introductory premise.
Also, the persistent allure of American pop culture artifacts - films, styles of dress, junk food - across the globe seems to contradict your assertions and strengthen your debating opponents' arguments.
Ironically, the so-called neo-cons are among the few people who seem to believe the US is not merely in relative but actually quite steep decline. Their partially executed plans for directly seizing control of Arab destinies comes, it should be clear to everyone by now, not from an overestimation of American strength but from a calculation of how short a time the window of unilateral military action will remain open before competitors such as China possess the ability - and will - to counter.
Indeed, the "full spectrum dominance" doctrine (also known as Joint Vision 20 20) is mostly built upon the idea that the US has a desperate need to prevent rivals from rising to global prominence.
This is not the plan of a confident hegemon but an elite who sees significant problems with their 58 year old system of rule and who're taking steps to reinforce it.
So, only the most radical wing of the imperialist camp seems to take the idea of swift erosion seriously (of course, there's also, on the left, I. Wallerstein among others but his ideas, though certainly not dismissed, don't appear to be very popular in wider left circles - at least not in this neighborhood). Most of the rest of us believe the US to be essentially as dominant now as it was in 1946 only with a few bits of rust on the star destroyer's hull plating here and there from age.
...
The US is an immense, fiery object, spinning very rapidly. It's difficult to see its surface characteristics or direction of movement clearly (down or up?) because of all the light-effect distractions and intense radiation - the pile of money, the pile of weapons, the lines around the corner in New Delhi for the latest American special effects blockbuster...
So, when this fireball enters a contest we assume it'll be victorious and stop looking more closely at the details. Note how many people believe the US to dominate the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary.
This suggests a powerful belief is at work and, like lapsed Catholics, even the formerly faithful (the left, I suppose?) who criticize and declare a schism still look up in a sort of wonder at the thing.
.d.