Between Sansa and Daenerys, who would make the better ruling Queen?

[Hodor the Articulate]

On 4/12/2016 at 1:26 AM, Kaibaman said:

the throne out of necessity and afterwards had no interest in handling the ruling or politics which came with the job. Dany on the other hand is very interested in becoming a good ruler and while she may not have the experience needed to be

The topic of discussion is ruling, and who would be better at it, so I don't see what Dany's and Robert's times not-ruling has to do with anything. We do not get to see how differently Robert ruled during war vs. during peace (though it doesn't seem like he did much ruling either times), and we have yet to see what Dany is like ruling a peaceful region. The two aren't comparable.

1 hour ago, Risto said:

The Westerosi value you speak about has been transmitted through Viserys and I am afraid she is for some rude awakening.

And you think that Westerosi will be open to the armies of former slaves, pirates and Dothraki? That she will land and everyone will be: "OK, we have been waiting you to wage another war so you could put your ass on Iron Throne". Just by being a Ruling Queen, she is enforcing a new system. Are we certain that Dany will leave everything as it was in Book 1? Lion's share of her character is a revolutionist, an agent of change, someone who can change the failing system. And Westerosi system is the system that needs to be changed. But, change does not come easily. And change always cause opposition. Just like with Aegon V, expecting that Highlords of Westeros would sit calmly while Daenerys ties their power and hands will be extremely naive.

Everyone forgets that she was raised by Willem Darry for the first five years of her life. Also, we have Dany's POV - we know, first hand, that she is culturally more aligned with Westeros than Essos, despite living in the latter for almost all her life.

I don't think anyone seriously thinks she's just going to bulldoze through Westeros with no opposition, but she's also not going to be alone. Westerosi nobility may not appreciate the changes she may bring, but they'll make concessions to curry favour with her, just as she will to them.

[Jeeves]

Sansa and Ruling do not belong together.  Sansa is unfit for leadership.  On the other hand, Daenerys is gaining valuable experience in Meereen.  Daenerys also showed effective leadership and got her Dothraki through the Red Waste.  That's not something Sansa could do.  Somebody would have to carry Sansa on their back through the desert and all the while she's complaining about the corns on her feet.  

It's an easy pick for me.  Daenerys would make the better ruler.  I may as well answer another question.  Yes, Daenerys would make a much better ruler than Jon Snow.  

[khal drogon]

8 hours ago, Risto said:

She knows Westeros just lrulinu and I know about it. For her, Westeros is a story Viserys told her, some pictures on the wall, some chapter in history book. She doesn't know Westerosi, as she has never lived on Westeros. The Westerosi value you speak about has been transmitted through Viserys and I am afraid she is for some rude awakening.

And you think that Westerosi will be open to the armies of former slaves, pirates and Dothraki? That she will land and everyone will be: "OK, we have been waiting you to wage another war so you could put your ass on Iron Throne". Just by being a Ruling Queen, she is enforcing a new system. Are we certain that Dany will leave everything as it was in Book 1? Lion's share of her character is a revolutionist, an agent of change, someone who can change the failing system. And Westerosi system is the system that needs to be changed. But, change does not come easily. And change always cause opposition. Just like with Aegon V, expecting that Highlords of Westeros would sit calmly while Daenerys ties their power and hands will be extremely naive.

Yes, what happens in the longer run is what matters, but I doubt we will have books about Dany's entire reign (that said, if she ends up being the ruler of 7 Kingdoms as we know tthe

This Westerosi unfamiliarity is over exagerrated in my opinion. Westerosi moral values are very close to her moral values compared to the Ghiscari and Dothraki hence the problems with them. She tried to emulate Westeros in Meereen which resisted her. Her conversations with Barristan or the Dornishmen didn't make her feel alien at all and in fact she familiarized pretty easily. She aligns with Westerosi morals more than any others. Viserys fed her the wrong history but beyond that she was also knew information about it from Jorah and Ser Barristan. I agree that it is like a book but a very familiar book. This rude awakenment maybe possible when she learns about her family but Westeros it would hardly surprise her. It won't be the ideal place she once dreamed off. But she has seen enough of the world to be shocked by that.

Westerosi will not be welcoming any army that is the truth. Do you they want the Lannisters on the throne? Or a pirate sorcerer King with longships? The only seemingly better option landed with sellswords and his company too didn't invoke a positive opinion in the stormlands. Westerosi are not having a bunch of great choices either.

What the hell are you talking about her being a queen means enforcing a new system? You say she would change a failing system. Isn't that good in the longer run? Why do you think she won't expect any resistance while she change the system after all her experience in Meereen? It won't make sense. Anyways that's a lot of conjectures.

You agree what happens in the longer run matters but go on judging people from a very short period of time. At least Martin wrote her arc about learning the concept of rulership from Book 1. Yet you claim Sansa will be better where we never saw her leadership at all.

[Mladen]

14 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

This Westerosi unfamiliarity is over exagerrated in my opinion. Westerosi moral values are very close to her moral values compared to the Ghiscari and Dothraki hence the problems with them. She tried to emulate Westeros in Meereen which resisted her. Her conversations with Barristan or the Dornishmen didn't make her feel alien at all and in fact she familiarized pretty easily. She aligns with Westerosi morals more than any others. Viserys fed her the wrong history but beyond that she was also knew information about it from Jorah and Ser Barristan. I agree that it is like a book but a very familiar book. This rude awakenment maybe possible when she learns about her family but Westeros it would hardly surprise her. It won't be the ideal place she once dreamed off. But she has seen enough of the world to be shocked by that.

It can be exaggerated, but it should not be dismissed. Yes, certainly, Dany relates to Westeros as she has never related to any of the places we have seen her in. But, we need to understand that some ideas she may have or haven't can be deadly for her. Martin sending Tyrion who is destined to meet her at some point is just preparing her for what is going to be rather difficult campaign. Because she will need to face some truths. And what will happen if Aegon unites people to rally behind him and oust Lannisters? How will Westerosi see her at the head of the army of slaves, pirates and Dothraki? Yes, some may welcome her. Others will be afraid and they will want to fight her. For them, she is a stranger. The unknown piece of the board. And if her arrival means even more fights, who knows how people will react.

Quote

Westerosi will not be welcoming any army that is the truth. Do you they want the Lannisters on the throne? Or a pirate sorcerer King with longships? The only seemingly better option landed with sellswords and his company too didn't invoke a positive opinion in the stormlands. Westerosi are not having a bunch of great choices either.

I wouldn't dismiss Aegon so lightly. Daenerys HOTU vision clearly suggests that he may be the popular one, while she may be welcomed with animosity. Westerosi understand sellswords. Dothraki are different story for them.

I would agree they have no great choices. But, they may choose what they think is the least evil. And Dany may find herself not liking the perception her countrymen have on her.

Quote

What the hell are you talking about her being a queen means enforcing a new system? You say she would change a failing system. Isn't that good in the longer run? Why do you think she won't expect any resistance while she change the system after all her experience in Meereen? It won't make sense. Anyways that's a lot of conjectures.

Her being a ruling Queen is a change from the enforced system in Westeros where only a man can sit on Iron Throne. That alone is a big change. Not that it will be the only one. Or at least that is what I think...

I am talking about what Daenerys has been doing for the past several books. As the Queen, she has been agent of change, someone who destroyed systems. Do you think she will be happy to see that in her precious homeland, Highlords can do whatever they want , that people serve just to be killed, raped etc. Do you think she will remain deaf to the cries of the people? She won't. And she may find herself in position Aegon V found himself in. Dany will try to change things but she may find herself becoming unpopular on both fronts. 

Quote

You agree what happens in the longer run matters but go on judging people from a very short period of time. At least Martin wrote her arc about learning the concept of rulership from Book 1. Yet you claim Sansa will be better where we never saw her leadership at all.

I can only judge them based on what is in the books and that is a short period of time. I can't judge them based on who knows what will happen in the future. At the end, we all judge people based on their past and present, not their possible future.

Well, I do believe that Sansa would make a solid leader. Just like we expect Daenerys to be the agent of change, someone who will shake up Westeros, we can expect Sansa to be someone who is able to play the Game of Thrones rather successfully. After all, as Martin himself said about Sansa, she has wits same as LF. I do believe she can be a great ruler. That said, I don't see her being one at the end.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

18 hours ago, khal drogon said:

He find it tedious and he can't listen to people's complaints. Yes in that sense he knew he will be terrible but it is because of disinterest not because he tried and failed. 

You are talking for almost 15 years after he became the King. We don’t know how he started.

18 hours ago, khal drogon said:

What nonsense? If one learned how to rule they will only be good at ruling. If they are not then they have more to learn. 

By your logic since all the children are going to school all of them will end up being really good students. 

18 hours ago, khal drogon said:

I don't see why Dany wouldn't improve further. None suggests she would remain the same forever.

Well from what we have seen so far the future doesn't seem very bright for her. Her actions point at her being at least insufficient.

[khal drogon]

8 hours ago, Risto said:

It can be exaggerated, but it should not be dismissed. Yes, certainly, Dany relates to Westeros as she has never related to any of the places we have seen her in. But, we need to understand that some ideas she may have or haven't can be deadly for her. Martin sending Tyrion who is destined to meet her at some point is just preparing her for what is going to be rather difficult campaign. Because she will need to face some truths. And what will happen if Aegon unites people to rally behind him and oust Lannisters? How will Westerosi see her at the head of the army of slaves, pirates and Dothraki? Yes, some may welcome her. Others will be afraid and they will want to fight her. For them, she is a stranger. The unknown piece of the board. And if her arrival means even more fights, who knows how people will react.

I wouldn't dismiss Aegon so lightly. Daenerys HOTU vision clearly suggests that he may be the popular one, while she may be welcomed with animosity. Westerosi understand sellswords. Dothraki are different story for them.

I would agree they have no great choices. But, they may choose what they think is the least evil. And Dany may find herself not liking the perception her countrymen have on her.

Her being a ruling Queen is a change from the enforced system in Westeros where only a man can sit on Iron Throne. That alone is a big change. Not that it will be the only one. Or at least that is what I think...

I am talking about what Daenerys has been doing for the past several books. As the Queen, she has been agent of change, someone who destroyed systems. Do you think she will be happy to see that in her precious homeland, Highlords can do whatever they want , that people serve just to be killed, raped etc. Do you think she will remain deaf to the cries of the people? She won't. And she may find herself in position Aegon V found himself in. Dany will try to change things but she may find herself becoming unpopular on both fronts. 

I can only judge them based on what is in the books and that is a short period of time. I can't judge them based on who knows what will happen in the future. At the end, we all judge people based on their past and present, not their possible future.

Well, I do believe that Sansa would make a solid leader. Just like we expect Daenerys to be the agent of change, someone who will shake up Westeros, we can expect Sansa to be someone who is able to play the Game of Thrones rather successfully. After all, as Martin himself said about Sansa, she has wits same as LF. I do believe she can be a great ruler. That said, I don't see her being one at the end.

Westeros acting as a singular entity is never going to happen. NEVER going to happen. I don't see Aegon ever unite Westeros to his cause. He would be doubted and his rise to power will be through dubious means and would be based on shaky grounds. That's what his arc is heading towards. I find it unrealistic to believe that all of Westeros will have a common opinion on her. And then I see a lot of theories are based on that BS. Also Dany isn't a naive idiot to believe her company will not be problematic and get shocked while they do. She will use them because that's all she got. Yet I see her being ruthless if any of her own army men go out of line and that might attract some. She also has something Aegon don't, a legitimate Targaryen name which no one doubts and of course dragons. I could see Westeros getting polarized between options than it oppose her together.

Where it is said only a man could sit the Throne? People have come a long way from having a steady line of rulers to utter chaos that started from AGOT. With bastards and pretenders vying for the throne I doubt they would care about the Targaryen law. I don't think it is ever implied that Westerosi lords don't prefer a female monarch and that is coded in the system.

Dany being unpopular if she reformed the system I see it as a natural reaction and I want it to happen. I don't think she shouldn't reform because she would be resisted. So Go Dany!!

You believe Sansa would be a good leader based on what? While I think of Sansa I think of survivor or a politician(which she is yet to be). But a Ieader doesn't come to my mind at all. She has never proved her leadership. I could never see her as a ruler other than being a consort or a ceremonial head. In fact I see only Arya as the natural leader among all the Starks. 

2 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

You are talking for almost 15 years after he became the King. We don’t know how he started.

By your logic since all the children are going to school all of them will end up being really good students. 

Well from what we have seen so far the future doesn't seem very bright for her. Her actions point at her being at least insufficient.

That's the description of his own experience ruling in his own words. I doubt it is about the latter part of his life. 

My logic is one going to school will always have the better chance to improve than one not going to school.

I know your opinions of her so don't care to argue.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

13 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

That's the description of his own experience ruling in his own words. I doubt it is about the latter part of his life. 

You can doubt it all you want since we don't have his PoV to know his thoughts I don't see how we can be sure.

13 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

My logic is one going to school will always have the better chance to improve than one not going to school.

Better chance doesn't mean that it will happen especially when she has proved to be unwilling to learn, I am the blood of the dragon do not presume to teach me lessons, and she was the one who decide to undo her actions and prove that she wasn’t very bright, Green Grace, making money from slave trading and becoming a slaver and so on. She is young but she isn't very bright and learning cannot make her a genius or even smart.

13 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

I know your opinions of her so don't care to argue.

Well it was her decision to make all those dumb decisions, not mine.

[khal drogon]

6 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

You can doubt it all you want since we don't have his PoV to know his thoughts I don't see how we can be sure.

Better chance doesn't mean that it will happen especially when she has proved to be unwilling to learn, I am the blood of the dragon do not presume to teach me lessons, and she was the one who decide to undo her actions and prove that she wasn’t very bright, Green Grace, making money from slave trading and becoming a slaver and so on. She is young but she isn't very bright and learning cannot make her a genius or even smart.

Well it was her decision to make money from slave trading not mine.

You continue to surprise me with how much one could do to hate on a fictional character.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Just now, khal drogon said:

You continue to surprise me with how much one could do to hate on a fictional character.

Same could be told for people who love her and defend everything she does.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Actually she takes a sales tax on transactions in the city she is ruling.  She is NOT a slaver, and she does not 'make money on the slave trade'.  She takes a tax on her citizens just like every other ruler in the history of the real world and the world of fiction.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

12 hours ago, khal drogon said:

This Westerosi unfamiliarity is over exagerrated in my opinion. Westerosi moral values are very close to her moral values compared to the Ghiscari and Dothraki hence the problems with them. She tried to emulate Westeros in Meereen which resisted her. Her conversations with Barristan or the Dornishmen didn't make her feel alien at all and in fact she familiarized pretty easily. She aligns with Westerosi morals more than any others. Viserys fed her the wrong history but beyond that she was also knew information about it from Jorah and Ser Barristan. I agree that it is like a book but a very familiar book. This rude awakenment maybe possible when she learns about her family but Westeros it would hardly surprise her. It won't be the ideal place she once dreamed off. But she has seen enough of the world to be shocked by that.

Westerosi will not be welcoming any army that is the truth. Do you they want the Lannisters on the throne? Or a pirate sorcerer King with longships? The only seemingly better option landed with sellswords and his company too didn't invoke a positive opinion in the stormlands. Westerosi are not having a bunch of great choices either.

What the hell are you talking about her being a queen means enforcing a new system? You say she would change a failing system. Isn't that good in the longer run? Why do you think she won't expect any resistance while she change the system after all her experience in Meereen? It won't make sense. Anyways that's a lot of conjectures.

You agree what happens in the longer run matters but go on judging people from a very short period of time. At least Martin wrote her arc about learning the concept of rulership from Book 1. Yet you claim Sansa will be better where we never saw her leadership at all.

All excellent points.  She relates to the Westerosi way of life already (seeing as how they were ruled by Targaryens for hundreds of years), agree Viserys told her some lies, but she has since learned most of what he said was BS and she accepts that.  The Baratheon/Lannister rule is not much different in terms of laws except that it's worse for the citizens in every way.  The Mad King's madness is not indicative of all the families' rulers, he was just one man.

It's super easy to see Dany is a just ruler and is able to learn.  She is everything Cersei is not. 

 

Sansa might make a good ruler in a fairy tale world lol (or in a country club situation), but in Westeros things are too harsh and ugly for her to make any tough decisions.

[khal drogon]

17 hours ago, Suzanna Stormborn said:

Actually she takes a sales tax on transactions in the city she is ruling.  She is NOT a slaver, and she does not 'make money on the slave trade'.  She takes a tax on her citizens just like every other ruler in the history of the real world and the world of fiction.

In fact taxing slave trade is discouraging slave trade and ensuring flow of money to the pro-abolishment power center which will use it to sustain the changing economy of Meereen. It is much much better than suicidal attempt of blocking that money flow which it desperately needs. I am more happy that she actually understands it and not naively oppose it for the sake of ideology. It needs selective reading and multiple twisting of facts to call her a Slaver.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

18 hours ago, Suzanna Stormborn said:

Actually she takes a sales tax on transactions in the city she is ruling.  She is NOT a slaver, and she does not 'make money on the slave trade'.  She takes a tax on her citizens just like every other ruler in the history of the real world and the world of fiction.

Quote

"In Astapor the city took a tenth part of the price, each time a slave changed hands," Missandei told her."We'll do the same," Dany decided. Wars were won with gold as much as swords. "A tenth part. In gold or silver coin, or ivory. Meereen has no need of saffron, cloves, or zorse hides."

That is making profit from slave trading. She destroyed their life and when they are forced to sell themselves to slavery on order to have a decent life she takes their money not just once but every time they change hands. If it was any other character he or she would have been a slaver but Dany the Immaculate is a saint. Utter 

[khal drogon]

3 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

That is making profit from slave trading. She destroyed their life and when they are forced to sell themselves to slavery on order to have a decent life she takes their money not just once but every time they change hands. If it was any other character he or she would have been a slaver but Dany the Immaculate is a saint. Utter 

While they want to sell themselves she is pro "choice" and she taxed the transactions causing losses to the sellers who are slavers. This would be used to rectify the situation she created because of her destruction of the slave trade. If this is not the best course of action then what is.

First read the definition of the word "Slaver". A Slaver is a person who "owns" and deals with people as property. It really tells how much you hate her when you twist even English words to malign her.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

29 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

While they want to sell themselves she is pro "choice" and she taxed the transactions causing losses to the sellers who are slavers. This would be used to rectify the situation she created because of her destruction of the slave trade. If this is not the best course of action then what is.

First read the definition of the word "Slaver". A Slaver is a person who "owns" and deals with people as property. It really tells how much you hate her when you twist even English words to malign her.

The moment when a child has to die for his culture and his family business which was never illegal and you excuse someone who makes money from people who voluntarily sell themselves to slavery you have lost any credibility or respect you could have. You can say whatever you want the fact that it’s that defending someone who makes money because people cannot live their life as a result of her actions while at the same time blame children for what their parents did is hypocritical. The people sold themselves into slavery because of Dany’s actions and she took their money, that is her becoming a slaver no matter if you like it or not.

[khal drogon]

26 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

The moment when a child has to die for his culture and his family business which was never illegal and you excuse someone who makes money from people who voluntarily sell themselves to slavery you have lost any credibility or respect you could have. You can say whatever you want the fact that it’s that defending someone who makes money because people cannot live their life as a result of her actions while at the same time blame children for what their parents did is hypocritical. The people sold themselves into slavery because of Dany’s actions and she took their money, that is her becoming a slaver no matter if you like it or not.

 

That happened because of their "choice" which they owe it to her because they would have remained the same if not. Except a large number of people wanted that "choice" and even those few people sold their "free will" by their own choice. How is she to blame for giving them that "choice"? Those few supported themselves in an oppressive system and they still want that oppressive system to take their free will. How is that her fault more than their own?

Who are those children anyway? I guess you are talking about Astapor. Because the most accepted definition of children is "people between the infant stage and puberty". The average age where puberty starts is the age of 12. Also her orders explicitly say "harm no child under twelve". So no more word-play and fact-twisting to bash her. 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

24 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

That happened because of their "choice" which they owe it to her because they would have remained the same if not.

You mean they would had died in the havoc she had created.

24 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

Except a large number of people wanted that "choice" and even those few people sold their "free will" by their own choice.

You are right, they sold themselves because her war and her ego had destroyed their lives.

24 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

How is she to blame for giving them that "choice"?

She was the one who brought war to their lives and destroyed their lives.

24 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

Those few supported themselves in an oppressive system and they still want that oppressive system to take their free will. How is that her fault more than their own?

Again, she had brought war to their city and had destroyed their lives because she thought that it conquering those cities without any plan for the future was the right thing to do. They had to save themselves from her governing. She was the reason why they had to leave their homes.

24 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

Who are those children anyway? I guess you are talking about Astapor. Because the most accepted definition of children is "people between the infant stage and puberty". The average age where puberty starts is the age of 12. Also her orders explicitly say "harm no child under twelve". So no more word-play and fact-twisting to bash her. 

Yet in ASOIAF 12 years old are children  and that is why they need a regent. If they were you have to admit that 13 old Dany wasn't a child either during agot so she was a fair game for those who wanted to kill her. 

My point still stands she ordered children to die for something their family did before it become illegal.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

24 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

That happened because of their "choice" which they owe it to her because they would have remained the same if not. Except a large number of people wanted that "choice" and even those few people sold their "free will" by their own choice. How is she to blame for giving them that "choice"? Those few supported themselves in an oppressive system and they still want that oppressive system to take their free will. How is that her fault more than their own?

Who are those children anyway? I guess you are talking about Astapor. Because the most accepted definition of children is "people between the infant stage and puberty". The average age where puberty starts is the age of 12. Also her orders explicitly say "harm no child under twelve". So no more word-play and fact-twisting to bash her. 

It is perfectly reasonable to tax transactions that happen under your rule, whatever they are. Dany fought as hard as she could against slavery, but like you said, in the end she had to concede to the world she lived in.  In Astapor no children under 12 were killed as has been proven 10000 times on this forum, in the books and confirmed by the WOIAF app.  And the only teenagers killed were those wearing the slaver garb which was the main source of income in Astapor for most of its citizens, certainly the ones in the slaver Tokars. Who on their own were responsible for the deaths of countless children and puppies.  There is no argument here to condone the slavers of Astapor, even the teenagers.  If killing children is ones highest concern then it is obvious what Dany did (even if a few pre-teens/teens were killed) was making the death toll of children drop enormously by ending the slaver trade wheel there, thus she should be supported not criticized for that act.

[khal drogon]

3 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

You mean they would had died in the havoc she had created.

Or they didn't because they are alive.

3 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

You are right, they sold themselves because her war and her ego had destroyed their lives.

Yeah their lives were destroyed so much that they tried to destroy it again by losing free will.

3 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

She was the one who brought war to their lives and destroyed their lives.

Millions of freedmen disagree.

3 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Again, she had brought war to their city and had destroyed their lives because she thought that it conquering those cities without any plan for the future was the right thing to do. They had to save themselves from her governing.

Irony is they support a system which destroys the lives of millions of people.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

1 minute ago, khal drogon said:

Or they didn't because they are alive.

Yeah their lives were destroyed so much that they tried to destroy it again by losing free will.

So Dany's and Viserys' life wasn't bad just because they were left alive?

2 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

Millions of freedmen disagree.

You mean the people who died from pale mare or the people who sold themselves to slavery?

3 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

Irony is they support a system which destroys the lives of millions of people.

Yet it was never illegal. I am not saying that it was morally right I am saying that it was never illegal. Incest  is disgusting and illegal in Westeros yet you don't seem to have a problem with that.