As usual, you bring up fair points and good descriptions. Patton wasn't exactly a nice guy, but a good general. I think the show has skewed my view on some of these characters as compared to the books. It's been a while since I've read (or listened) to them, and I get the story mixed with the show's version often. All of the leaders listed make bad decisions, some to their ultimate demise. Stannis IS portrayed as more of an antagonist, so arguably my opinion is a bit colored by that. But, his character seems to be written more as a leader concerned with justice and receiving the respect and honors that are due to him, if not always earning them. Davos is a loyal follow of Stannis, no doubt, and his continued support in the book is a strong case for Stannis (since Davos is written as a much more sympathetic character). I know leaders don't have to be rosy, and good leaders need to make hard choices. But, for whatever reason, Stannis just can't regularly inspire enough houses to his banner. "Stannis is pure iron, black and hard and strong, yes, but brittle, the way iron gets. He'll break before he bends." I agree that Jon's biggest drawback is probably his indecisiveness; he's just kind of wishy-washy by the end of the show. It's a good burn about him "falling out" with some of the other Brothers of the Night's Watch. I don't think that was because he made bad leadership choices, or failed to inspire a big group of his followers (both Night's Watch and the Wild Folk by that stage). His fault was in underestimating the hostility of his Brothers. Still, people flock to him because he is also a man of his principles/honor. I'm probably just too much of a sucker for the apparent "hero" of the story so far (I really enjoyed the "noble/honorable" Ned Stark). Aside from how Jon was played out in the show, I think he's a capable young leader. But, I'll retract my comment that Stannis is a weak choice.