I think it's close, but I would say the Lannisters have a bit more intelligence and cunning, and as we know that's the most important thing in the game of thrones so I would lean slightly towards them.

It's a weird thing to say, but if the Lannisters weren't so dysfunctional they wouldn't be as cunning as they are. They learned their skills in the nursery, vying for Tywin's attention by imitating him and fucking each other over. Their weakness is also what makes them strong. If they could still be fucked up but manage to not murder each other: unstoppable.

Literally! All he had to do was wait his turn!

Very fair point I do think the Tyrells wanted someone controllable, but I don't see them shifting over to the Lannisters simply because Renly submitted to his brother. They would make their disagreement known but I feel like in the end they would relent. It's the best option for everyone.

It's not even about them shifting, but at all picking him as their pawn initially. Olena arranged for Loras to seduce him and Margaery to mary him because she could controll him. They also they did shift in OT and could just sit it out and move inn on a weakened foe afte Lannister, Baeretheon and Stark fight it out.

him and stannis would still have the entire force of the stormlands+dragonstone WHILE the lannisters were already busy facing north+riverlands & the tyrell would have no reason to join the lannister

Thanks! I appreciate that

Renly is a certified idiot. I don't see him ever being a successful King. The North and the Riverlands would never accept him if he went to war with Robb, which he would have because he didn't accept a King in the North. The Vale and Iron Islands weren't accepting him under any circumstances. And he'd have to kill every Lannister to stay safe at court, turning the Westerlands against him. He'd basically have the Crownlands, Stormlands and the Reach behind him. With Dorne in the distance, unless he could offer them a path back to the royal family through a betrothal. Given that he would never have children, this is unlikely. You'd just have an idiot King with 2-3 Kingdoms in line under the scheming Tyrell's as opposed to an idiot King with 2-3 Kingdoms in line under the scheming Lannisters. The only 'good' monarch on the Iron Throne would be Ned, one of his children or Daenerys, with Tyrion or Varys as Hand. The Starks never wanted the Iron Throne but Robb would have been a great King. He brings with him multiple kingdoms, would have swiftly executed most of the snakes in Kings Landing, he is a peerless tactician that would keep the kingdoms in line through fear but he is also a just man that would make amends with all kingdoms and not allow internal conflict to break out. If he had kept Theon at his side, he would also be the only person who could tame the Iron Islands. Basically, if Robb's family were smarter (Edmure, Lysa and Catelyn were both fools) , he didn't break his oath to House Frey and his second most powerful Bannerman didn't betray him, he should have won the Game of Thrones. He should have the impregnable North, the fertile Riverlands, the Knights of the Vale and the Iron Fleet behind him, with Jaime Lannister as a captive.

I think you're right about the skills of a battle commander not translating to ruling, but as a book reader I find it insanely hard to see Renly as a more fitting option than Stannis. Yess, he isn't well liked, but I feel like Renly could have aided him on that front and Stannis could gain some the more "kingly" skills in time.

Stannis also make good king better than him