Her second marriage was the showrunners' idea.
Well, I'm not blaming Martin for it. It was stupid idea that made no sense, and she didn't have to go along with it. Wasn't the point of her swaying all cocky through the Eyrie with her black-winged cleavage dress that she was calling the shots now, that she had the upper hand over Littlefinger and she knew it?
I would argue the question of who is most worthy of the throne, should be based on the book character or show character from seasons based on the books, plus an extrapolation of those characters based on their show-only seasons doppelgangers.
The versions from the two media are so nonsensically different, there is no point in bringing them together. The promotional stuff for this season has all been about "who is going to win the Iron Throne" and in the books, I strongly suspect that's not going to matter. The wildfire that the Mad King planted in Kings Landing is still there like Chekov's gun, and two different Targaryen claimants have their eyes on the throne, and one has dragons. Plus Euron in the books has that whole Loveraftian god thing going on, with Aeron's vision from the WoW preview chapter suggesting he's going for the Iron Throne too. So Dany will either come to Westeros pissed as all get out that her benefactor has been backing another Targaryen with a better claim this whole time, or else Aegon's going to take the throne with the help of the Sand Snakes who are infiltrating the court, and then Euron's going to eat them or something, and Dany will show up to fight Euron in an ascended form or the entity Euron is serving, and either way, she's going to make the city go ka-boom, just like her father planned. That's the parallel with her and Jon, and the family legacy stuff.
Needless to say, I don't see any of this coming out on the show. So why bring the books into this? There are already significant divergences, like Joffrey taking over Cersei's King Herod stunt, and Cersei having Robert's baby (although for some reason, they kept the fortune teller's prophecy that says she will only have three children, which has already been proven false, since she's had four).
I am assuming you say Jon is a moron when it comes to military stuff based on his actions during the battle of the bastards, but that whole ordeal's logic was sacrificed for emotional impact.
It doesn't matter what the Doylist reasons are, when you are making a Watsonian assessment of the characters. In-universe, Jon threw away his general's baton to become a common soldier, to borrow a WoT description.
Why would the wildlings stand around like dopes while the Bolton army surrounds them ?
I would say, poor leadership? If I was trying to fan-splain an excuse, I would say that their culture with its personal leadership emphasis has a tradition of Homeric champions duking it out, so they were expecting someone from the Bolton side to issue a challenge, rather than just tighten the circle while hiding behind shields like cowards.
A bigger question is where did Ramsey get the crack professional troops drilled in formation maneuvers? Or how did the charge of the Knights of the Vale avoid crushing Jon's force in the middle of the enemy formation? How were Jon's infantry, without polearms or tight formations, able to easily handle the charge of the Bolton cavalry that they were so worried about in their war councils, only to be helpless before that deployment of the encircling troops? Why did the corpses, on open, flat ground, pile up in mounds? That happens in narrow areas, like breeches or chokepoints, where the troops HAVE to go. Why are they gathering around piles of bodies to fight and fall down onto the heap, and make it get higher and higher?
Intelligent writers could get just as much emotional impact by a rationally executed battle.
