President Thatcher, 1980

Let's say that Margaret Thatcher had been born while her mother was in the United States, and so was technically a natural born citizen. Now let's say that after university, she emigrated to the US and got involved in politics. Eventually, even if it may be ASB, she fights her way to the top and secures the Republican nomination for President in 1980. Now, several questions are subsequently posed:
1. Could she have won the election?
2. Who would her running mate likely have been?
3. What would a Thatcher presidency have looked like?

For this, we assume that her politics were generally the same as they were in reality.
 
Wasn't Thatcher basically the same ideologically as Reagan? so a Presidency of hers in the US would basically just be Reagan's.
 
I suspect that the backlash to AmeriThatcher will be greater than the backlash to Reagen OTL, so the Democrats might win in 1988.
 

Tovarich

Banned
Oh crap, I think I shat my pants!

The words "President Thatcher" is what kept me a loyal Monarchist for all these decades, they having the power to make me wake screaming in a sweat at night......don't do that to me! :eek:

Phew, she's only going to be POTUS, that's alright then.....what a relief!
 

Gaius Julius Magnus

Gone Fishin'
. Now, several questions are subsequently posed:
1. Could she have won the election?
If it's still Jimmy Carter and the circumstances are similar to the actual 1980 election, than probably.
2. Who would her running mate likely have been?

What state is she from? Since she would probably be from the conservative wing of the party than probably a moderate. Bush, Baker, maybe Ford if he was still President had she made a similar offer.
.
3. What would a Thatcher presidency have looked like?
For starters, probably a more harsh relationship with the Democratic Congress, provided they still control it.
 
Last edited:
Thatcher would probably have more confrontations with the Dem House and moderate Republicans. To fully implement her agenda she'd need the Gingrich Congress or one very similar ideologically. Different economic approach - no supply-side. Much tighter oversight of the administration than Reagan.
 
The words "President Thatcher" is what kept me a loyal Monarchist for all these decades, they having the power to make me wake screaming in a sweat at night......don't do that to me! :eek:

Phew, she's only going to be POTUS, that's alright then.....what a relief!

Yep, exactly my reaction :eek:
 
Also consider that the Thatcher nomination could be seen as a conservative backlash to ERA getting passed in c.1978. With Thatcher's politics, they would be compared to Phyllis Schlafly, who was one of the active opponents to the amendment.
 
Spaced Willies

Also consider that the Thatcher nomination could be seen as a conservative backlash to ERA getting passed in c.1978. With Thatcher's politics, they would be compared to Phyllis Schlafly, who was one of the active opponents to the amendment.

Ok, now you've done it. President Thatcher, Veep Schlafly. I feel like cockroaches are crawling all over my skin and I can't move. AGGGHHH! :eek:
 
Tueasyvsdrernoon

I think there would have been better social policy. She apparently told George HW Bush that he would lose to Bill Climton due to the Repuclicans policies towards women's reproductive rights especially to do with contraception and abortion which even Margaret Thatcher thought were repressive and regressive as far back as 1990.

She also had a much better practical HIV / AIDS policy than Ronald Reagan.
 
Ok, now you've done it. President Thatcher, Veep Schlafly. I feel like cockroaches are crawling all over my skin and I can't move. AGGGHHH! :eek:
Well in all due fairness, I didn't propose them as a ticket but rather how they are birds of the same feather. Ideologically they are the same.
 
No one has pointed out that she wouldn't be Margaret Thatcher in this TL?

1) her personality would be very different from the different environment
and
2) The probability of her marrying someone with the surname "Thatcher" is very, very small.

I think it would be fun if she were a left wing Democrat, which is entirely possible with that early a PoD.
 

Tovarich

Banned
No one has pointed out that she wouldn't be Margaret Thatcher in this TL?
That's because we're not all the ASB-Police!
Alternate History is a form of literature and fun, not a branch of science.

Put it this way: There's a VERY old free story from Kim Newman about John Major still being PM in a 'Successful Sealion ' World, which is all obviously bullshit.... ... http://www.angelfire.com/ak2/newmanbyrne/majors.html ....but we must allow some artistic licence for fiction; otherwise we're the AH equivalent of the Goskomizdat.
 
Last edited:
That's because we're not all the ASB-Police!
Alternate History is a form of literature and fun, not a branch of science.

The 'branch of literature' subforum is called "The Writer's Forum" and/or "ASB and other Magic"

This (and pre-1900) are Alternate HISTORY fora, where things are supposed behave according to logical developments, not according to authorial fiat.
 
The 'branch of literature' subforum is called "The Writer's Forum" and/or "ASB and other Magic"

This (and pre-1900) are Alternate HISTORY fora, where things are supposed behave according to logical developments, not according to authorial fiat.

Is it actually implausible for an American female politician to arise in the same timeframe as Thatcher with similar ideology? Not really. Then what she's actually called is just bookkeeping. Strictly, no, she wouldn't be Margaret Thatcher, but calling her that means everybody knows who we're talking about.
 
Is it actually implausible for an American female politician to arise in the same timeframe as Thatcher with similar ideology? Not really. Then what she's actually called is just bookkeeping. Strictly, no, she wouldn't be Margaret Thatcher, but calling her that means everybody knows who we're talking about.

My comment was in reply to Tovarich, not claiming that Margaret whatsis is impossible. Just saying that she'd not likely be the same personality.
 
I suspect that the backlash to AmeriThatcher will be greater than the backlash to Reagen OTL, so the Democrats might win in 1988.

Something like the Poll Tax in the US could provoke a Tea Party movement 20 years earlier, actually. But as mentioned, she'd need a Gingrich '94 Congress for that.

I think there would have been better social policy. She apparently told George HW Bush that he would lose to Bill Climton due to the Repuclicans policies towards women's reproductive rights especially to do with contraception and abortion which even Margaret Thatcher thought were repressive and regressive as far back as 1990.

She also had a much better practical HIV / AIDS policy than Ronald Reagan.

What about the War on Drugs, though? Considering that the 1980s were the height of the crack epidemy in the USA, Thatcher would take that as an opportunity to introduce something along the lines of her ID card scheme.
 
Top