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

[Hodor the Articulate]

22 hours ago, Risto said:

Robert was a commander of the armies, a face of the rebellion, someone who inspired respect and loyalty even from his opponents. That said, in all but name, Robert was the King to those who fought for him. The thing is that Robert, in many ways like Dany, is someone who understands war, who can easily operate when they know who is the enemy. But, in time of peace, the situation is significantly different and you have to juggle between various people, some of whom you are not sure you can trust. Being a ruler during peaceful time is not easy either. 

As I said, Robert didn't do any ruling during the war, so the situations aren't comparable.

[Mladen]

1 hour ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

As I said, Robert didn't do any ruling during the war, so the situations aren't comparable.

Robert did as much of the ruling as Daenerys did until she sat down in Meereen. So, yeah, the situations are completely comparable. Robert was the Commander in Chief, he was the one chosen to be the next King, he was pardoning people who were opposing him... Pretty much the same Dany has been doing. 

[Kaibaman]

3 hours ago, Risto said:

Robert did as much of the ruling as Daenerys did until she sat down in Meereen. So, yeah, the situations are completely comparable. Robert was the Commander in Chief, he was the one chosen to be the next King, he was pardoning people who were opposing him... Pretty much the same Dany has been doing. 

One thing to note is that in the beginning Robert didn't have any ambition to become king. Him taking up arms against the Targaryens and then hijacking the Iron Throne was in reaction to his own personal safety and that of his friends rather than some manifested purpose in life. The fundamental difference between Dany and Robert is that Robert did not want to be king in the first place and only took 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 an effective one at present, she is far more driven when it comes to the business of ruling than Robert ever was. 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

On 2/12/2016 at 9:17 PM, Lord Friendzone said:

Here we go again with Viserys. Don't forget to say how Jon will be disgusted by this when he hears it. 

You might find it funny but it's Dany's word against what happened. There is no reason why people should believe what she has to say especially since she would had most likely killed Aegon too.

[Lord Varys]

We actually don't know when Robert decided he would like to be king. He came right next after Rhaegar's children and Viserys in the line of succession, and he had nursed his hatred of Rhaegar since Harrenhal. He might very have begun to dream big in the very moment Aerys II declared war on him.

This idea that anybody aside from Arianne is ever going to care about Viserys Targaryen is just silly. The man was an obscure exile pretender and his fate is only discussed once in ACoK. Arianne is only obsessed with him and his fate because she was supposed to marry him and is now somewhat bitter that her brother is now supposed to marry Viserys' younger sister.

Lots of people arranged the murders or directly killed their close relations and were never punished for it nor did they ever lose support of their followers (e.g. Maegor the Cruel - when he killed his nephews Aegon and Viserys -, Prince Daemon, Prince Aemond, Bloodraven, Stannis, etc.).

Dany might face opposition when she is seen as a foreign conqueror who is cruelly executing people for no good reason. But there is no reason why we should assume she is going to behave in such an erratic manner nor does this mean she won't be able to remove all the opposition standing in her way.

[khal drogon]

On 12/3/2016 at 2:38 PM, Risto said:

Robert did as much of the ruling as Daenerys did until she sat down in Meereen. So, yeah, the situations are completely comparable. Robert was the Commander in Chief, he was the one chosen to be the next King, he was pardoning people who were opposing him... Pretty much the same Dany has been doing. 

Also the comparison ends there. Their reign became completely different after they became rulers. Robert's terrible because he didn't even try. Dany's terrible because she is young and inexperienced. Apples and Oranges. I don't see how they are similar other than them excelling at wartime comparatively more than peacetime. 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

11 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

Also the comparison ends there. Their reign became completely different after they became rulers. Robert's terrible because he didn't even try. Dany's terrible because she is young and inexperienced. Apples and Oranges. I don't see how they are similar other than them excelling at wartime comparatively more than peacetime. 

What is better knowing that you will be awful and not trying while leaving it to better hands or knowing that you are awful and destroying everything trying to learn something that doesn't mean that you will be good at the end?

[khal drogon]

On 11/28/2016 at 6:22 AM, Hodor the Articulate said:

There's an idea that keeps popping up in this thread, that Sansa would be a better ruler in times of peace, while Dany would do better in war and strife, that I think is BS. Surely, it's more logical that if you can handle ruling during the most harrowing of times, you'll be even better in the best of times?

The best thing Dany learned from being with the Dothraki or after she began leading armies is that she has the basic understanding about how a kingdom works. She understands logistics. economics and management of resources on a larger scale is something that is common for both wartime and peacetime. I doubt Sansa knows these things at all. The only thing I think Sansa will be better than Dany is in politics which is better if the ruler is better at it but it is not all he/she needs. In that sense I see Sansa complimenting Dany and Sansa would make an excellent political adviser than a ruler.

[khal drogon]

9 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

What is better knowing that you will be awful and not trying while leaving it to better hands or knowing that you are awful and destroying everything trying to learn something that doesn't mean that you will be good at the end?

 

Robert is disinterested in ruling not that he knew he would do awful and left it for the better hands. And there is no wrong in trying to rule because there are going to be mistakes. Dany like Jon is awful but learning to rule is the only way to become a ruler. No one becomes the best at the first try.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

1 minute ago, khal drogon said:

Robert is disinterested in ruling not that he knew he would do awful and left it for the better hands. And there is no wrong in trying to rule because there are going to be mistakes. Dany like Jon is awful but learning to rule is the only way to become a ruler. No one becomes the best at the first try.

How do you know that? How do you know that Robert didn't knew that he wasn't good are ruling? Do you have Robert's PoVs? Would you in your real life like an awful ruler who uses the excuse that he learns how to rule? Because I don’t think that anyone in his right mind would had want something like that.

Also there is nothing to say that Dany will be a good ruler in the end even if she learns how to rule.

[khal drogon]

1 minute ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

How do you know that? How do you know that Robert didn't knew that he wasn't good are ruling? Do you have Robert's PoVs? Would you in your real life like an awful ruler who uses the excuse that he learns how to rule? Because I don’t think that anyone in his right mind would had want something like that.

 

Also there is nothing to say that Dany will be a good ruler in the end even if she learns how to rule.

 

Because it is said in text that Robert is disinterested. His disinterest was talking as he himself say

Quote

"I swear to you, sitting a throne is a thousand times harder than winning one. Laws are a tedious business and counting coppers is worse. And the people … there is no end of them. I sit on that damnable iron chair and listen to them complain until my mind is numb and my ass is raw. They all want something, money or land or justice. The lies they tell … and my lords and ladies are no better. I am surrounded by flatterers and fools. It can drive a man to madness, Ned. Half of them don't dare tell me the truth, and the other half can't find it. There are nights I wish we had lost at the Trident. Ah, no, not truly, but … "

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. 

In real life there are no monarchy and I wouldn't want to live in a monarchy. But in a monarchy an inexperienced ruler would make mistakes and trying to learn is already expected from them. 

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. 

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

[Mladen]

1 hour ago, khal drogon said:

Also the comparison ends there. Their reign became completely different after they became rulers. Robert's terrible because he didn't even try. Dany's terrible because she is young and inexperienced. Apples and Oranges. I don't see how they are similar other than them excelling at wartime comparatively more than peacetime. 

We were speaking about someone sucking during peace time. Regardless of what the reasons may be, there are those who can excel during war times, but suck during peace times. It is possible. And both Dany and Robert, each on their own way, show failings in leadership while at the same time they have been lauded as great conquerors. 

[khal drogon]

7 minutes ago, Risto said:

We were speaking about someone sucking during peace time. Regardless of what the reasons may be, there are those who can excel during war times, but suck during peace times. It is possible. And both Dany and Robert, each on their own way, show failings in leadership while at the same time they have been lauded as great conquerors. 

Yeah it is possible. But why they both failed is also really important. It seems you are using the superficial similarity in their arcs to imply that Dany will end up being like Robert which doesn't make sense because they are fundamentally different.

[Mladen]

Just now, khal drogon said:

Yeah it is possible. But why they both failed is also really important. It seems you are using the superficial similarity in their arcs to imply that Dany will end up being like Robert which doesn't make sense because they are fundamentally different.

No, I am not using Robert as the example that Dany will fail, I am just saying it is possible that great conquerors make bad leaders in peacetime. That said, we have entire 5th book to see some of the Dany's failings as the leader. We don't need to go through Robert's reign to make the said argument.

[khal drogon]

22 minutes ago, Risto said:

No, I am not using Robert as the example that Dany will fail, I am just saying it is possible that great conquerors make bad leaders in peacetime. That said, we have entire 5th book to see some of the Dany's failings as the leader. We don't need to go through Robert's reign to make the said argument.

We don't know what sort of ruler Dany will be in peacetime though as I wouldn't call Meereen peaceful. The Fifth book deals with problems very unique to that part of the world which won't be a sample of how she would do elsewhere. Anyway it is to be seen how her experience there will shape her.

[Mladen]

6 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

We don't know what sort of ruler Dany will be in peacetime though as I wouldn't call Meereen peaceful. The Fifth book deals with problems very unique to that part of the world which won't be a sample of how she would do elsewhere. Anyway it is to be seen how her experience there will shape her.

Yes, but at the same time, the 5th book show us Dany's general lack of direction. She has no "peacetime strategy", she changed the system, but struggles with the enforcing a new one. Some of those problems are unique to Meereen, but she will also face opposition and cultural shock when it comes to Westeros. And that is the continent she wants to rule to the day she dies. She will have to be ready to make a lot of compromises and lot of politicking in order to be a successful leader.

[khal drogon]

31 minutes ago, Risto said:

Yes, but at the same time, the 5th book show us Dany's general lack of direction. She has no "peacetime strategy", she changed the system, but struggles with the enforcing a new one. Some of those problems are unique to Meereen, but she will also face opposition and cultural shock when it comes to Westeros. And that is the continent she wants to rule to the day she dies. She will have to be ready to make a lot of compromises and lot of politicking in order to be a successful leader.

I don't see what is this "cultural shock" she would face? Even if she grew up in the free cities she was brought up by a Westerosi with Westerosi value. Maybe you could elaborate on the "cultural shock" part.

Enforcing a new system there would not come without resistance because she is opposing the mighty there. She didn't weaken the nobility there who financially support the resistance there which is the problem with her in the 5th book. Most of the struggles she face are the ones associated with newly conquered states and of the unfamiliar culture and very little in common with Westerosi problems.

Westeros is already familiar to her. Yes she has an idealized version of that place in her mind but it wouldn't be that much shocking for her compared to Meereen or the Dothraki Sea. In Westeros she is not going to enforce any new system so it won't be the same.

Most of the problems you mentioned would stop being problems after sometime like initial shock and opposition. What happens in the longer run is what matters.

[Lord Varys]

Dany is not likely to face the sort of opposition she faced in Meereen. The Meereenese didn't want her there nor did they want to change their way of life.

Dany is a Targaryen, and is thus likely to be accepted as the Queen Regnant on the Iron Throne. In addition, there is no reason to fear that she will change the way of life of the people in Westeros.

There could be some minor conflicts about her religion and companions but if she also surrounds herself with Westerosi people things should be fine in the long run.

[Kaibaman]

1 hour ago, Risto said:

No, I am not using Robert as the example that Dany will fail, I am just saying it is possible that great conquerors make bad leaders in peacetime. That said, we have entire 5th book to see some of the Dany's failings as the leader. We don't need to go through Robert's reign to make the said argument.

I agree conquerors do not always make great statesman. Because its one thing to take power by force and an entirely new ball game to keep it in peace times. However I think you are being a little narrow minded to think because Robert's rule was a disaster, therefore all conquerors will make bad leaders. Remember becoming a monarch wasn't Robert's calling in life as it is for Dany. Again even though both Dany and Robert had a great deal of potential to become great rulers after their conquests, Robert had no interest at all in taking up the reigns of power and only saw the Iron Throne as an outlet for his own fun and pleasures while Dany sees her throne and the responsibility that comes with it as a personal vocation. 

[Mladen]

34 minutes ago, Kaibaman said:

I agree conquerors do not always make great statesman. Because its one thing to take power by force and an entirely new ball game to keep it in peace times. However I think you are being a little narrow minded to think because Robert's rule was a disaster, therefore all conquerors will make bad leaders. Remember becoming a monarch wasn't Robert's calling in life as it is for Dany. Again even though both Dany and Robert had a great deal of potential to become great rulers after their conquests, Robert had no interest at all in taking up the reigns of power and only saw the Iron Throne as an outlet for his own fun and pleasures while Dany sees her throne and the responsibility that comes with it as a personal vocation. 

Nowhere have I stated that just because Robert was a failure as a leader that means Daenerys will inherently be. Just that case can be made that great commanders are not necessarily great statesmen. I do believe that Daenerys is not exactly the best leader, regardless of her good will and intentions. Will she be a terrible leader? I doubt that. The truth, as it happens most of the time, is somewhere between. I have issues with Dany mostly due to what she has been doing in Book 5, not her conquering campaign.

1 hour ago, khal drogon said:

I don't see what is this "cultural shock" she would face? Even if she grew up in the free cities she was brought up by a Westerosi with Westerosi value. Maybe you could elaborate on the "cultural shock" part.

Enforcing a new system there would not come without resistance because she is opposing the mighty there. She didn't weaken the nobility there who financially support the resistance there which is the problem with her in the 5th book. Most of the struggles she face are the ones associated with newly conquered states and of the unfamiliar culture and very little in common with Westerosi problems.

Westeros is already familiar to her. Yes she has an idealized version of that place in her mind but it wouldn't be that much shocking for her compared to Meereen or the Dothraki Sea. In Westeros she is not going to enforce any new system so it won't be the same.

Most of the problems you mentioned would stop being problems after sometime like initial shock and opposition. What happens in the longer run is what matters.

She knows Westeros just like you 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 knew them).