They need someone NEUTRAL, as Jon would cause too much of a rift and he had to be punished for being a Queenslayer. And since Bran is literally all-seeing in space and time, then he can be a WISE ruler with a vast amount of knowledge, too.
Or are people against the idea because he's disabled in the conventional sense?
Lol. Brian admitted he mostly lives in the past. Don't you think someone who mostly lives in the present should be king. Lol what a joke
sharehe's wise enough to let one of the kingdoms break out of his rule the second after he's named king. he doesn't even think of the consequences of it. what the fuck?
shareStairs
shareI didn't totally buy him being chosen as king and everyone agreeing to it. Apparently he has a great story to tell. Well I would say there are other characters who have as good if not better a story, particularly Jon, whose claim to the throne seemed to have got completely ignored by the way.
I can buy him being a safe pair of hands as King, and not being corrupted by power in the way that others have, so in that sense it's a good choice though.
The main reason Bran is not a bad choice is because he breaks the cycle of a king or queen passing the throne to their offspring, even if twisted, evil in-breds (most Targaryans). That was Tyrion's main point.
He'd probably be a decent king to a heavily depopulated world. I mean, for starters, I expect at least 25% of the adult males in Westeros (and the Dothraki to the east) are dead.
Many people think the small council was a huge waste, to me it showed that administrative details still must be dealt with, and I thought it was a somewhat entertaining portion of the episode.