What would suggest that the rulers of any country are sane? National policies pretty much everywhere involve practices for which it would be difficult to mount any defence other than insanity--without bothering to itemize, the entire recent history of murder and fraud that emenates from the eminent.
To cite a very specific case, and the one that I find most like current events, let's look to John F. Kennedy and the Cuban missile crisis. A lot of us might be more inclined to trust Kennedy than a number of people who have come later, and yet his quite popular handling of the Cuban missile crisis came only a lucky stroke from blowing up most of the planet.
As a condition to remove nuclear missiles from Cuba, Kruschev demanded that Kennedy remove similar missiles poised near Russia's southwestern borders. As it happened, Kennedy had intended to do so anyway because the missiles had become obsolete, in large part because of the new missiles that could be launched more surreptitiously from submarines, making them more difficult to parry.
However, once Kruschev demanded that they be removed, Kennedy refused to do so to save face: he did not want to back down to communists.
During this process, a Russian submarine armed with nuclear warheads was subjected to "signalling" depth charge fire (presmably a safe distance away). It's radio was out, so it had no communication either with the Americans at the surface or with Moscow. Thinking that the war had begun, two of three officers wanted to fire their arsenal. Only officer Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov refused to authorize the launch, and eventually convinced his fellow officers to bring the sub to the surface.
Apparently Westerners did not know this until records emerged from the Kremlin a few years after the fall of the Soviets.
And the reason to put the entire world at risk was that Kennedy or the US or someone like that might otherwise look bad.
If there is any reason to consider the current leading candidates saner or less warlike, it might be interesting to hear it.