Many scholars and media pundits alike bemoan Americans' political ignorance. Facing stiff competition for their viewers from cable television in the 1980s, the broadcast news networks increased their coverage of softer news topics. Consequently, some claim that the public is less politically engaged today than they were in the days of when the network news focused on public affairs. Using cognitive measures of how Americans evaluate presidential candidates, I show that they are more engaged today than before the rise of cable television. The public has more reasons for supporting and opposing presidents when they run for reelection than they did four years before. They also learn more about a president's policies than his character. Perhaps more importantly, the public is learning as much about presidents and their policies in the cable era than in the years when broadcast news focused primarily on public affairs. The cable era is not creating a class of political dropouts. Politically uninterested Americans are more likely to abandon the network news when they get access to cable. They are actually learning more about presidents and their policies in the cable era than in the days when the average household had fewer television channels. Even though the public is more engaged about presidents today than in the past, they typically are not aware of vice presidents when it is their turn to run for president compared to incumbents and challengers. Consequently, Americans tend to evaluate VPs more in terms of their character than their policies, whereas incumbents are evaluated for their record. This evidence supports previous research that implies vice presidents do not get credit for the current administration's record