Well, for me it is Bush. I see Gore as a hothead or someone who gets real angry when he doesn’t get his way(almost like a little kid). This goes for more than just the button to. I think he would definetely deploy our troops(our guys to die) faster than Bush would. Where as Bush would only do it if it needed to be done.
What’s a ‘Button Bush’?
None of The Above.
Insert a comma after button, and it makes sense.
Bill, you really have the wrong impression. The BIGGEST concern for the Bush campaign (seriously, I don’t have cites, but I have heard reporters and commentators comment on it), was his temper. He had an enormous temper tantrum with Ann Richards during the Texas Governor’s race.
But that’s not the issue. A hot temper really isn’t going to be a factor in nuclear annihilation. Disposition towards war is. Democrats are all about extending the arm of democracy, and exerting our influence afar. Republicans are about protecting the country and projecting fear of retaliation MAD style.
Its going to be a tie. Buchanan is the only candidate I could see even contemplating using the bomb. Gore or Bush would use every means necessary to avoid it. Its a non-issue.
Whoops!
There’s a dirty joke in there somewhere. . .
Gore.
Texas leads the nation in executions by a wide margin. That ought to be enough to indicate Bush isn’t afraid to let people die. There are other reasons, but that’s one.
Esprix
Esprix,
I don’t know if that is a good reason. I think Bush is just enforcing the law in Texas which his job. And death to sorry killers is not like dropping a bomb on innocent people.
But Gore does seem hot tempered and doesn’t seem to handle pressure very well.
Wildest Bill, I think that’s the most unfair statement you’ve made so far. Both Bush and Gore have handled pressure extremely well. That’s why both of them have 40% of the country wanting each of them to represent them to the nation. For every example you come up with where you believe that Gore can’t handle pressure (see my thread in MPSIMS where I deride him on a recent interview), I’m sure that I could point you to any number of questions I’ve seen Bush encounter incredibly horribly. Regardless, they both have had some serious shortcomings in their careers, and both have rebounded extremely well. While I think that there are a number of candidates who would be much better candidates for the Republicans, I don’t think that either of them have any SERIOUS character flaws (Bush can for the most part make up for his lack of presidential intelligence with a strong staff) that’s going to send the country to the shitters.
Actually, that’d be here in IMHO.
But I’d also like to add that a traditional Republican stance has been that there is a need to have a strong capable military. Nothing wrong with that belief. But many (see: McArthur) feel that an unused weapon is a useless weapon. This is not a widely Republican view, but those who hold it are much more likely to be Republican. I’m not saying that Bush holds this opinion, but the odds are better that he does than Gore does.
And again, temper has nothing to do with it.
There are several well-known cases where Bush had the power to either stay the execution or push for a new trial when there was a preponderance of evidence to suggest innocence. But even if they were all guilty, Bush has consistently pushed for the death penalty and has shown little leniency. Sounds like he cares little for who might or might not be innocent. And surely if we’re at war with someone, they are the enemy - also not innocent. Gore, to me, just seems to have a whole fucking lot more sensitivity and compassion than old Dubya.
I disagree, and it has always been my own personal impression that Bush handles stress poorly.
Esprix
Y’know, every time you hear something bad about Texas, it’s always the same old thing from the Bushers: Texas is a weak-governor state; the governor can’t actually do anything about that. So you can’t hold that against our Shrub.
There are two problems with this:
a) it’s a copout, since he may not have power but he does have influence (and can be judged on how he uses it), and
b) it says it’s ok for a guy with no substantial governing experience to become President.
Funny, after all this ‘geez, he’s just a wooden automaton’ stuff, now he’s too hot-tempered.
Of course, since the likelihood of nuclear war is by far the lowest it’s been in my lifetime, I can’t say I rank this issue highly.
Ugh. Gore, without a doubt.
Didn’t Bush make fun of the woman-oh, what was her NAME that he was going to execute? Didn’t he laugh at how she said, “Please, don’t kill me.”
Well, remember that it’s not an acutal button, but an authentication code that the President has to read over a secure comm link. If Dubya is as stupid as some people think he is, he’d probably flub the code, so no nukes. 
3waygeek beat me to it.
The Straight Dope column (including Slug Signorino’s illustration) can be found on pages 239-241 of Cecil Adams’ book «The Straight Dope».
Of course, procedures have probably changed since then, but in the column, the description is:
«The president is accompanied at all times by an Air Force warrant officer carrying a thin black satchel containing the Emergency War Order (EWO)) authentication codes. To launch a nuclear attack, the president calls up CINCSAC (commander in chief, Strategic Air Command, Omaha, Nebraska), uses the codes to establish that he is indeed the president, and gives his orders. The president’s codes, it should be noted, are not “enabling” codes - that is, you don’t actually have to punch them into the computers to initiate the firing sequence. …
CINCSAC, an Air Force general, sits on a Captain Kirk-like command chair on a balcony overlooking SAC’s Underground Command Post. If the post were to be destroyed, command would automatically shift to a specially equipped E-4B jet, one of which is kept in the air at all times, or to one of several dozen other auxiliary command posts.
Having verified the president’s orders - presumably several officers are involved in this for safety’s sake, but the details are not clear - CINCSAC activates the Single Integrate Operational Plan, a command sequencing computer that electronically issues EWOs to the pertinent parties. Again, details are a little vague, but apparently two sorts of command are sent. the first is a message to bomber an missile crews containing instructions and a verification code, which the recipients are required to check against their own code books. The second command is purely electronic in nature, and arms each launch device via something called a Permissive Action Link, which is a sort of safety catch.
After each land-base missile command center confirms its orders, two crew members must simultaneously turn brass keys at control consoles some distance apart, casting one “launch vote.” The crew in another command center some miles away does the same thing, and the two votes together launch 10-40 ICBMs. On submarines, tow officers dial combinations into a special safe, do the same thing on another safe inside the first, get the brass key, an give it to the captain, who arms the missiles. Then four officers locate in various parts of the vessel press buttons or turn still more keys to initiate launch. On bombers, two or three officers have to cooperate to arm the bombs.
etc…»
In My Humble Opinion:
When people actually allow themselves to base their vote on idiotic points such as this, the election really truly is a popularity contest.
Do you people really think you know anything about a presidential candidate’s character? To say that one “seems hot tempered” presumes that everything he says on TV and in interviews is not carefully planned to make him more appealing to your base instinct. If you base your decisions on this, you might as well buy everything you see commercials for, too.
If you need something to base your decision on, try actual issues.