Would Margaret Thatcher be voted PM in 2025?
Poll: Would Margaret Thatcher be voted PM in 2025?
Total Members Polled: 104
Discussion
It depends how 'meta' you want to get.
Literal Marget Thatcher from 1979/1983, with the same ideology, same policies, same rhetoric?
Probably not.
A 'Margaret Thatcher for the 2020s', with the same approach, personality, resolution and - crucially - the same ability to present compelling and resonant solutions for the issues facing the electorate, speak from the heart about how her personal morals and beliefs shape her beliefs and her vision for the country, and paint an aspirational picture of a different way of doing things after 15 years of malaise that cuts across traditional political and social boundaries?
Possibly.
The Thatcher fans (like a lot of fans of specific politicians) often overlook that success as a politician is much more about being able gather and carry people with you by gelling with their values and desires than just hammering the same points against and against. That's dogma, and it's a big part of what led to Mrs. T's downfall.
Those are significantly different in the UK in 2025 as they were in 1979. So are many of the systemic problems.
Thatcher Redux wouldn't just parrot identical policies, even if the fundamental ideology was the same.
Literal Marget Thatcher from 1979/1983, with the same ideology, same policies, same rhetoric?
Probably not.
A 'Margaret Thatcher for the 2020s', with the same approach, personality, resolution and - crucially - the same ability to present compelling and resonant solutions for the issues facing the electorate, speak from the heart about how her personal morals and beliefs shape her beliefs and her vision for the country, and paint an aspirational picture of a different way of doing things after 15 years of malaise that cuts across traditional political and social boundaries?
Possibly.
The Thatcher fans (like a lot of fans of specific politicians) often overlook that success as a politician is much more about being able gather and carry people with you by gelling with their values and desires than just hammering the same points against and against. That's dogma, and it's a big part of what led to Mrs. T's downfall.
Those are significantly different in the UK in 2025 as they were in 1979. So are many of the systemic problems.
Thatcher Redux wouldn't just parrot identical policies, even if the fundamental ideology was the same.
I don't see her Policies winning the Leadership Vote in the first place. Pro-Common Market, Pro-EU membership (although fought like a Lion to make UK position as favourable to us as possible) Pro-NHS and other neoliberalism policies aren't really part of the Conservative dogma at the moment. The flag-waving bit might play with some of them, might even pull a few Reform people back, but voters these days are looking for quick, easy solutions that don't really exist.
If she stood in 2024, she would have to s
t all over her party's policies from the time Major left power, 'New Conservatives' and based on her in the 80s, she would have to admit it's a long difficult road and many people don't want to hear it.
If she stood in 2024, she would have to s
t all over her party's policies from the time Major left power, 'New Conservatives' and based on her in the 80s, she would have to admit it's a long difficult road and many people don't want to hear it.Yes, and she'd do so by talking about many of the same planning issues that Starmer is while also attacking their jobs tax.
We have a similar feeling of malaise and weariness (starting around the GFC and Brexit knocking the recovery in the national mindset and Covid and Ukraine destroying any confidence we have left) and someone who is more upbeat about the future and can lay out a story of how we got here and a clear plan for how we can get out of the rut.
We have a similar feeling of malaise and weariness (starting around the GFC and Brexit knocking the recovery in the national mindset and Covid and Ukraine destroying any confidence we have left) and someone who is more upbeat about the future and can lay out a story of how we got here and a clear plan for how we can get out of the rut.
Edited by Mr Penguin on Friday 7th February 13:51
She was a woman in a mans world back in the 70s.
Alot of sexism.
She got no breaks. Women in the work place were secretaries etc etc. Nevemind a woman in a leader position.
Watching some of her interactions she was very assertive, forward and no mess.
Now? A 2020s Maggie? Yes.
Everyone now wants to appeal to everyone. She wouldn't.
Alot of sexism.
She got no breaks. Women in the work place were secretaries etc etc. Nevemind a woman in a leader position.
Watching some of her interactions she was very assertive, forward and no mess.
Now? A 2020s Maggie? Yes.
Everyone now wants to appeal to everyone. She wouldn't.
glazbagun said:
"I have a plan, lets privatise everything" wouldn't have the same appeal. Also IIRC she was criticised for her handling of the economy until Argentina and Scottish oil stepped in to help out.
She'd be crucified today. Post-Brown she would have had a chance, but not post Sunak.
Yes - the privatisations idea wouldn't go down well with everyone. She'd be crucified today. Post-Brown she would have had a chance, but not post Sunak.
Hugo Stiglitz said:
She was a woman in a mans world back in the 70s.
Alot of sexism.
She got no breaks. Women in the work place were secretaries etc etc. Nevemind a woman in a leader position.
Watching some of her interactions she was very assertive, forward and no mess.
Now? A 2020s Maggie? Yes.
Everyone now wants to appeal to everyone. She wouldn't.
Not sure about that last bit. Trump just ran a successful campaign by doing the exact opposite, in fact.Alot of sexism.
She got no breaks. Women in the work place were secretaries etc etc. Nevemind a woman in a leader position.
Watching some of her interactions she was very assertive, forward and no mess.
Now? A 2020s Maggie? Yes.
Everyone now wants to appeal to everyone. She wouldn't.
How to say you recently watched the Channel Four two parter about the famous interview she had with Brian Walden, without saying you watched it!
She was and remains a bit of a contradiction for me. In some ways I really admired her…yet I disagreed with a lot of her politics and I think overall she left the country in a worse state than before she took power. Certainly we are still living with the consequences of the senseless privatisations of public utilities, the sell off of council houses (and controls that stopped councils from building more) plus the deregulation that has resulted in most British companies being owned and run by foreigners.
She was and remains a bit of a contradiction for me. In some ways I really admired her…yet I disagreed with a lot of her politics and I think overall she left the country in a worse state than before she took power. Certainly we are still living with the consequences of the senseless privatisations of public utilities, the sell off of council houses (and controls that stopped councils from building more) plus the deregulation that has resulted in most British companies being owned and run by foreigners.
You need to remember she was the most unpopular PM in the first couple of years. This applied to the rest of her party as well, and for good reason. The Argentinians salvaged her, and the political right press, more influential in those days, turned to support her with some energy.
It's difficult to separate the woman from the distortions fabricated by the media and her later supporters. The recent Thatcherites would have been dismissed by her as weirdos. As, indeed, do we. Some equate her with Churchill, and to a certain extent I agree, as the myth is so different to the reality as to be nonsensical. We, that's PHers, complain on here about our taxes going to boost the income of the low paid, but this should be laid at her door. Her errors are largely ignored, not even glossed over, but eradicated.
When she had the money from the North Sea to subsidise her dreams, things weren't too bad, but then came privatisation, selling off of council houses, and other similar short-term funding options.
What did for her was her. She became fixated on her own image. It was pointed out to her a number of times, and, eventually, publicly, she was making mistakes, with quality tory cabinet ministers going so far as to go, but she would not listen. She called it not turning but not having regard to much more experienced colleagues was the start of the presidential, in method if not as an adjective, pm. It is an unfortunate fact of life that people will continue to make the same mistakes if given a second chance and that is likely to go for her. She was one of the two most influential post war pms, but of the two, her and Atlee, she was the most profligate. Loads of money for the few.
They voted for the fluffy-haired bloke, and the fluffy-brained woman recently. They rudderless tories might make her pm in a desperate attempt to get back into power, but it would be a waste of time, a waste of effort and a waste of this country's dwindling assets.
It's difficult to separate the woman from the distortions fabricated by the media and her later supporters. The recent Thatcherites would have been dismissed by her as weirdos. As, indeed, do we. Some equate her with Churchill, and to a certain extent I agree, as the myth is so different to the reality as to be nonsensical. We, that's PHers, complain on here about our taxes going to boost the income of the low paid, but this should be laid at her door. Her errors are largely ignored, not even glossed over, but eradicated.
When she had the money from the North Sea to subsidise her dreams, things weren't too bad, but then came privatisation, selling off of council houses, and other similar short-term funding options.
What did for her was her. She became fixated on her own image. It was pointed out to her a number of times, and, eventually, publicly, she was making mistakes, with quality tory cabinet ministers going so far as to go, but she would not listen. She called it not turning but not having regard to much more experienced colleagues was the start of the presidential, in method if not as an adjective, pm. It is an unfortunate fact of life that people will continue to make the same mistakes if given a second chance and that is likely to go for her. She was one of the two most influential post war pms, but of the two, her and Atlee, she was the most profligate. Loads of money for the few.
They voted for the fluffy-haired bloke, and the fluffy-brained woman recently. They rudderless tories might make her pm in a desperate attempt to get back into power, but it would be a waste of time, a waste of effort and a waste of this country's dwindling assets.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff