What do you think of this argument that I found for why Dany isn't a good ruler?

[El Guapo]

The only rightful ruler is the person who can take and hold the throne.

Stannis has a claim

Daenerys has a claim

Jon has a claim

Tommen has a claim

fAegon has a claim

None of them are the rightful rulers, as there is no rightful queen or king

No, Tommen actually has the Iron Throne.

Everyone else you mention has a claim to that throne.

[Stormland's Fury]

Pretty much, yeah, whether or not people listen to you is mostly up to you.

Like Renly, he wasn't king by any rights but people still followed him.

I actually wouldn't over complicate it. This was only about the fact that Dany is queen , which she isn't.

[butterbumps!]

Right I agree, what I was saying is that Dany is not wrong to call herself the heir, just like Stannis isn't wrong when he says it. That does not mean they wont have to fight for it.

Well, to avoid confusion, it might be easier to say that she has a "claim." Though, I'm pretty sure she's not going to actually press said claim for the purpose of taking the throne in the near future anyway.

[OldGimletEye]

Well, yeah, a government based on the consent of the goverend would be best. But since that is not going to happen in Westeros for a long time, if ever, should the "rightful claimant" just be anybody with an army who thinks they have claim?

I don't think so.

[Stormland's Fury]

Well, to avoid confusion, it might be easier to say that she has a "claim." Though, I'm pretty sure she's not going to actually press said claim for the purpose of taking the throne in the near future anyway.

To clarify:

The one with the legitimate claim is Stannis

Tommen is king but not legitimate as far as we know.

Dany has a claim to the old dynasty, but I want to point out that she didn't even press her claim yet. At all. There was not even a letter, like Stannis' that informed Westeros that she's coming.

[Roddy the Ruin]

No, Tommen actually has the Iron Throne.

Everyone else you mention has a claim to that throne.

touché Guaps

[To catch a Lannister]

oh dear-- is this a "who's the rightful king" debate?

Anyone can lay a claim (even Euron); until the people of Westeros recognize said claimant as the authority-- for whatever reason-- then no one is "rightful."

This. It's like Varys said on the show power is essentially in the eye of the beholder, or really those who are ruled. Kind of ironic. Or isn't. I dunno. Nobody knows what that word means anymore. But yeah until the various lords/vassals/peeps of Westeros recognize the claimant as the monarch their claim is pretty much worthless.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Well, yeah, a government based on the consent of the goverend would be best. But since that is not going to happen in Westeros for a long time, if ever, should the "rightful claimant" just be anybody with an army who thinks they have claim?

I don't think so.

NO it shouldnt be, but that's basically how it is now, like I said the current king and his brother were not even related to the previous king, so everything is basically up in the air for grabs right now.

[Drake Heath]

To clarify:

The one with the legitimate claim is Stannis

Tommen is king but not legitimate as far as we know.

Dany has a claim to the old dynasty, but I want to point out that she didn't even press her claim yet. At all. There was not even a letter, like Stannis' that informed Westeros that she's coming.

Her shouting about "fire and blood" doesn't count?

[Stormland's Fury]

This. It's like Varys said on the show power is essentially in the eye of the beholder, or really those who are ruled. Kind of ironic. Or isn't. I dunno. Nobody knows what that word means anymore. But yeah until the various lords/vassals/peeps of Westeros recognize the claimant as the monarch their claim is pretty much worthless.

Concise as always, I think you won.

[To catch a Lannister]

Her shouting about "fire and blood" doesn't count?

I'm sure a few people in Westeros probably heard what she said just by sheer volume. Half her dialogue is in caps lock

[Stormland's Fury]

Her shouting about "fire and blood" doesn't count?

Doesn't she do that only in Essos and in company of Jorah and the like.

Well he's a Westerosi, so yeah. I guess.

;)

[iridescence]

Well, yeah, a government based on the consent of the goverend would be best. But since that is not going to happen in Westeros for a long time, if ever, should the "rightful claimant" just be anybody with an army who thinks they have claim?

I don't think so.

That's always been the way it is there though. The only reason the Targaryen dynasty existed at all was because Aegon had a bigger army/dragons. I don't even think they claim any divine right of kings (and even in real world divine right always boiled down to the guy who could actually take and hold the throne).

If Hodor could get enough nobles to follow him people would start making up reasons why he was actually the rightful king.

[Drake Heath]

Doesn't she do that only in Essos and in company of Jorah and the like.

Well he's a Westerosi, so yeah. I guess.

;)

She needs to shout louder then.

Maybe build a big horn and yell into it.

[Ziggy Targdust]

Well, yeah, a government based on the consent of the goverend would be best. But since that is not going to happen in Westeros for a long time, if ever, should the "rightful claimant" just be anybody with an army who thinks they have claim?

I don't think so.

But that's precisely what's going on.

There was no trial or anything to prove Tommen and Joff are bastards. We as readers know because of private confessions.

If Stannis is legal, the next time a prince doesn't have the same hair color as his king father then the next in line can just claim "bastard" and then he becomes the legal king.

[OldGimletEye]

NO it shouldnt be, but that's basically how it is now, like I said the current king is not even related to the previous king, so everything is basically up in the air for grabs right now.

But the previous king does have a legitimate heir. Now maybe Stannis doesn't deserve thrown. But if he doesn't, why? Is there some reasonable justification for removing him from power, other than of course "he isn't my favorite character".

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I'm sure a few people in Westeros probably heard what she said just by sheer volume. Half her dialogue is in caps lock

And this is where the thread takes a turn into fanfic, I'm out.

[Stormland's Fury]

She needs to shout louder then.

Maybe build a horn/mega phone thing and yell into it.

It's like someone starting as the new CEO next week and no one sent out a memo.

[OldGimletEye]

But that's precisely what's going on.

There was no trial or anything to prove Tommen and Joff are bastards. We as readers know because of private confessions.

If Stannis is legal, the next time a prince doesn't have the same hair color as his king father then the next in line can just claim "bastard" and then he becomes the legal king.

There would have been a legitimate reason to remove Joffrey. How about Tommen if he is thought to be the rightful king?

[butterbumps!]

Well, yeah, a government based on the consent of the goverend would be best. But since that is not going to happen in Westeros for a long time, if ever, should the "rightful claimant" just be anybody with an army who thinks they have claim?

I don't think so.

When Westeros recognizes a single authority figure, that figure becomes the "rightful" king. We don't need to overcomplicate this by bringing up some sort of democratic process invested with the authority of consensus in itself, for heaven's sake. What matters in terms of "rightful" is that people see this person as the authority. Whether it's because they are super swell, or because they beat the shit out of the opposition and there is just no fight left.

To clarify:

The one with the legitimate claim is Stannis

Tommen is king but not legitimate as far as we know.

Dany has a claim to the old dynasty, but I want to point out that she didn't even press her claim yet. At all. There was not even a letter, like Stannis' that informed Westeros that she's coming.

I don't know how I feel about getting into the whole "legitimacy" argument, but I'd posit that it's not that simple.

Robert, the king whose word is "law," decreed that his heir should succeed him. That heir is Stannis. But the people-- including Westerosi lords-- just don't care. So where is the authority that renders Stannis "legitimate?"

There's also the complication that the Baratheon dynasty took by Rebellion, and as such, exists beyond the realm of "law," which came from the Targs. That whole process wasn't "law" based (there was no social contract that decreed what the Rebels did was "lawful.")

I'm not sure it's that simple honestly.