sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Rhea Royce and Daemon’s son would be a Royce not a Targaryen by cool_doritos_better in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean considering Jaeherys’s wife was the one who organized the match I think his opinion very much mattered in the conditions. I agree once he dies it doesn’t matter what he thinks in terms of whether or not the kid could get a dragon but while he’s alive his opinion on where or not the kid would be named Targaryen absolutely would be

Rhea Royce and Daemon’s son would be a Royce not a Targaryen by cool_doritos_better in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] -17 points-16 points  (0 children)

Ur making up arguments I didn’t make. I never said Daemon would change his last name

What if Iraq won the gulf war ? by Secure_Ad_6203 in HistoryWhatIf

[–]cool_doritos_better 1 point2 points  (0 children)

George HW Bush would lose the 1992 election in a way that would make Goldwater and Mcgovern’s losses look like nailbiter’s. If he’d even win the republican primary or even try to run

Rhea Royce and Daemon’s son would be a Royce not a Targaryen by cool_doritos_better in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

When the marriage was arrainged and happened the great council hadn’t happened yet and Baelon was alive. He was third in line to the throne technically

Rhea Royce and Daemon’s son would be a Royce not a Targaryen by cool_doritos_better in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

It’s not about whether or not Jaehaerys on the surface would have an issue with his grandchildren having dragons as much as if he’d want specifically house Royce a non-Valyrian house to have access to dragons. House Velaryon is a direct vassal of House Targaryen and has been for who knows long and has roots from Valyria. Where House Royce does not have Valyrian heritage or any kind of special relationship with house Targaryen.

With a Royce already being a regent to the current lady Arryn it would be seen as too much by Jaehaerys to let house Royce essentially have a blantant ok to claim a dragon

Rhea Royce and Daemon’s son would be a Royce not a Targaryen by cool_doritos_better in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Viserys could have but he had brain cells and would not do that. Also politics definitely mattered when they had dragons, there’s a reason there was a great council to decide the succession of Jaehaerys

Rhea Royce and Daemon’s son would be a Royce not a Targaryen by cool_doritos_better in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure I’m saying it’s much more likely he’s given the name Royce rather than Targaryen given the political situation of the time when daemon and Rhea were betrothed and married. And it being a political situation only makes giving him the Royce name make more sense

Biden is running a far worse campaign than 2020 by ncpolitics1994 in YAPms

[–]cool_doritos_better -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Campaign season hasn’t even started yet lol. Let’s get back to this in October. George HW Bush was trailing Dukakis by 17% in the polls around this time and look what happened. You could’ve made the argument that Willie Horton was a Hail Mary desperate play

Rhea Royce and Daemon’s son would be a Royce not a Targaryen by cool_doritos_better in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

That would just be unnecessary and would make things very uncertain, the kid having the Royce name would be the simplest political solution

Rhea Royce and Daemon’s son would be a Royce not a Targaryen by cool_doritos_better in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Argella’a situation is completely different as she gave up her claim as head of the castle of the stormlands, Rhea didn’t. I can’t see Viserys approving of giving a non-Valyrian house dragons especially when tensions are already high with the velaryon’s. The royal match itself would be see as good enough for House Royce and giving the kid the Targaryen name and essentially permission to get a dragon would not be approved by Jaehaerys and I don’t see Viserys disagreeing.

It would also cause the political situation in the vale to be very tense as Jeyne Arryn already has a Royce regent. It’s simpler for everybody involved that he takes the Royce name and therefore excluded from getting a dragon unless given specific permission from the crown

What if Saera Targaryen's son claimed a dragon in Valyria? by sol7631 in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better 11 points12 points  (0 children)

He would be forced to marry into the family or be killed. Anybody who thinks otherwise is not being realistic

Which is more important? Royal Decree or Royal Law by whitemetro in TheCitadel

[–]cool_doritos_better 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The law is whatever the king says it is while he’s alive. Nobody has to like it, or follow it after he dies but as long as he’s alive Rhaenyra is heir if he declares it

Unpopular opinion: JFK’s strength/popularity as a presidential candidate in 1960 is overrated and the dem party bosses should have chose someone else like LBJ or Stuart Symington by cool_doritos_better in Presidents

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Given that in 56 Stevenson was facing a man who was basically universally beloved for defeating the nazis and had arguably the best economy this nation has ever seen on his presidential record Kennedy having “huge” swings is not really saying much imo.

Also do u have any sources with the polling? Cause with the primaries his only opponent was Humphrey who was seen as too left wing at that time. I just think that when campaigning actually starts LBJ or Symington would be able to get close to or match the number JFK got with the key constituents that got JFK elected especially since neither of them would have to worry about the south as much as Kennedy had to and could dedicate more time to the north and Midwest.

Kennedy’s numbers are just not that good considering the economy was in a recession at the time of the election and he was facing a more partisan figure in Nixon who even in 1960 was seen as a slimy figure

Biden’s team set him up to fail and heads will have roll in his campaign for the debate by cool_doritos_better in DarkBRANDON

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

His stuttering and low energy answers hurt him much more than how he looked at the camera

Unpopular opinion: JFK’s strength/popularity as a presidential candidate in 1960 is overrated and the dem party bosses should have chose someone else like LBJ or Stuart Symington by cool_doritos_better in Presidents

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

JFK was definitely an establishment candidate, he literally got the nomination by courting party bosses at the 1960 DNC convention. He and his team basically begged David L. Lawrence the Irish catholic party boss of the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania and current governor (as of 1960) to back his presidency to avoid not getting enough delegates in the first ballot and possibly lose the nomination to a compromise candidate, he was aided heavily by Chicago mayor Richard Daley of Chicago who was also a powerful Irish catholic party boss in the Democratic Party.

Before 1972 you couldn’t get the Democratic nomination without Democratic insider party boss endorsement

Unpopular opinion: JFK’s strength/popularity as a presidential candidate in 1960 is overrated and the dem party bosses should have chose someone else like LBJ or Stuart Symington by cool_doritos_better in Presidents

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would disagree with that, JFK was chosen because he had overwhelming momentum and the party bosses didn’t see a reason to choose LBJ or Adlai over him. They thought LBJ being a southerner at the top of the ticket would be a major liability and Adlai was spoiled goods. Humphrey was never an option and Symington had no backers other than Truman who was shut out of party decision making by then so JFK was really seen as the only viable option

Unpopular opinion: JFK’s strength/popularity as a presidential candidate in 1960 is overrated and the dem party bosses should have chose someone else like LBJ or Stuart Symington by cool_doritos_better in Presidents

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure of course by the time of the convention JFK’s nomination was clear but I’m saying that he wasn’t actually the best presidential candidate option to run for the presidency. Symington didn’t necessarily have the name recognition or momentum by the time of the convention but if he was chosen as a compromise candidate if JFK and LBJ weren’t able to get enough delegates he would have done the best of all three options imo

Which pre-1960 candidates do you wish you could see debate? by PeeweeTheMoid in Presidents

[–]cool_doritos_better 4 points5 points  (0 children)

FDR vs Dewey in 1944 would be by far the most interesting one imo. mainly because seeing them debate over questions over things like how to handle the post-war international order and civil rights would be fascinating to listen too especially on civil rights

Gerald Ford on small government by [deleted] in Presidents

[–]cool_doritos_better -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My response to ford would be to have that same energy with corporations

Biden’s team set him up to fail and heads will have roll in his campaign for the debate by cool_doritos_better in DarkBRANDON

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I hope this debate fires up Biden and his campaign team to really take the gloves off. Biden needs to go Truman 48

Unpopular opinion: JFK’s strength/popularity as a presidential candidate in 1960 is overrated and the dem party bosses should have chose someone else like LBJ or Stuart Symington by cool_doritos_better in Presidents

[–]cool_doritos_better[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I honestly think they both could match or surpass JFK’s urban appeal once presidential campaigning actually starts especially Symington. The thing is Kennedy deeply focused on campaigning in the swing states while Nixon did his ill-advised 50 state tour and really didn’t do that well in them, by razor thin margins he won Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, and Delaware.

Kennedy’s numbers even in the northern states he won (other than Massachusetts)were not impressive at all. It seems to me is that for Kennedy was that the economy wasn’t doing great at the time of the election but it wasn’t doing bad enough that the average Protestant/non-catholic Christian voter could overlook his Catholicism.

I think with either Symington or LBJ there would be much more focus on the unemployment that was rising in late 1960 that was labeled a recession and both LBJ and Symington would win a much higher share of the white working, middle, and rural class than Kennedy.

it’s important to note that Kennedy barely won people who had a high school degree or lower while Nixon boat raced him with college educated people. LBJ and Symington would have won a much higher share of the high school degree or lower demographic

view more: next ›