The Iron Lady - 1981 General Election

[Intell]

It really does, it means that you would support the most right-wing and reactionary british PM ever, which means you would support right-wing republican presidents, meaning you're probably a republican.

If you support thatcher, there's no fathomable reason why you'd oppose Trump anyway.

Didn't you, for an extended period of time, support Trump? I don't think you'd appreciate such deductive reasoning applied to you, would you?

I would've supported Alliance from the perspective of an American. Labour under Foot would not have represented the best interests of Americans (leaving the EEC and cancelling Trident come to mind), and I don't see why some people believe that a party in one country occupies the same ideological space as a party in another, even if they are the most analogous the way UK Labour and U.S. Democrats are.

What parties people support internationally isn't even particularly important, but people also have different values when it comes to the politics of countries not of their own.

Yes, that was stupid.

But the thing is thatcher is as socially reactionary as Trump and even more economically right-wing than him.

Supporting Alliance is perfectly fine, supporting Thatcher is not compatible.

[AtorBoltox]

I hate Thatcher and would usually vote Labour but unilaterally disarming at the height of the cold war is a such an insane idea. Alliance

[OSR stands with Israel]

It really does, it means that you would support the most right-wing and reactionary british PM ever, which means you would support right-wing republican presidents, meaning you're probably a republican.

If you support thatcher, there's no fathomable reason why you'd oppose Trump anyway.

Didn't you, for an extended period of time, support Trump? I don't think you'd appreciate such deductive reasoning applied to you, would you?

I would've supported Alliance from the perspective of an American. Labour under Foot would not have represented the best interests of Americans (leaving the EEC and cancelling Trident come to mind), and I don't see why some people believe that a party in one country occupies the same ideological space as a party in another, even if they are the most analogous the way UK Labour and U.S. Democrats are.

What parties people support internationally isn't even particularly important, but people also have different values when it comes to the politics of countries not of their own.

Yes, that was stupid.

But the thing is thatcher is as socially reactionary as Trump and even more economically right-wing than him.

Supporting Alliance is perfectly fine, supporting Thatcher is not compatible.

Thatcher was not anti immigrant , wasnt racist , and wasnt an incompetent fool like Trump is. 

[MAINEiac4434]

if you support thatcher then you would have support reagan since both were identical

Thatcher was arguably worse.

[MAINEiac4434]

*David Dimbleby voice*

"Current projection: Labour on track for an historic landslide, will win nearly 550 seats...Tories on their way to their worst defeat in their history, and the worst defeat of a governing party in history, with only 35 seats...Alliance will form the official opposition with 45 MPs...Margaret Thatcher may lose her seat in parliament...Scottish Nationals will double their representation to four."

[Intell]

It really does, it means that you would support the most right-wing and reactionary british PM ever, which means you would support right-wing republican presidents, meaning you're probably a republican.

If you support thatcher, there's no fathomable reason why you'd oppose Trump anyway.

Didn't you, for an extended period of time, support Trump? I don't think you'd appreciate such deductive reasoning applied to you, would you?

I would've supported Alliance from the perspective of an American. Labour under Foot would not have represented the best interests of Americans (leaving the EEC and cancelling Trident come to mind), and I don't see why some people believe that a party in one country occupies the same ideological space as a party in another, even if they are the most analogous the way UK Labour and U.S. Democrats are.

What parties people support internationally isn't even particularly important, but people also have different values when it comes to the politics of countries not of their own.

Yes, that was stupid.

But the thing is thatcher is as socially reactionary as Trump and even more economically right-wing than him.

Supporting Alliance is perfectly fine, supporting Thatcher is not compatible.

Thatcher was not anti immigrant , wasnt racist , and wasnt an incompetent fool like Trump is. 

Um, Yes She was, she especially targeting asians, and black people.

[Maxwell]

Labour!

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

It really does, it means that you would support the most right-wing and reactionary british PM ever, which means you would support right-wing republican presidents, meaning you're probably a republican.

If you support thatcher, there's no fathomable reason why you'd oppose Trump anyway.

Didn't you, for an extended period of time, support Trump? I don't think you'd appreciate such deductive reasoning applied to you, would you?

I would've supported Alliance from the perspective of an American. Labour under Foot would not have represented the best interests of Americans (leaving the EEC and cancelling Trident come to mind), and I don't see why some people believe that a party in one country occupies the same ideological space as a party in another, even if they are the most analogous the way UK Labour and U.S. Democrats are.

What parties people support internationally isn't even particularly important, but people also have different values when it comes to the politics of countries not of their own.

Yes, that was stupid.

But the thing is thatcher is as socially reactionary as Trump and even more economically right-wing than him.

Supporting Alliance is perfectly fine, supporting Thatcher is not compatible.

Thatcher was not anti immigrant , wasnt racist , and wasnt an incompetent fool like Trump is.  

Remember when Thatcher said that Britain was being "rather swamped" by "people with a different culture"? I certainly do.

And yes, Thatcher was even more destructive than Reagan.

huh, somehow I thought you were younger.

[Lumine]

1981 General Election:

October 1981 - Foot wins a historic landslide

Labour Party: 53.5% (554 MP's)
Conservative Party: 21.8% (49 MP's)
SDP-Liberal Alliance: 20.2% (23 MP's)
Others: 4.5% (22 MP's)

The 1981 Campaign started in a tense note for the Conservatives, trailing Labour by a few points and close to a surging SDP-Liberal Alliance. Desperate to win an increasingly uphill battle, Thatcher had sacked Party Chairman Peter Thorneycroft and placed her young protégé Cecil Parkinson in charge of the Conservative campaign, choosing to fight an aggressive, almost unhinged campaign focusing on the extreme Labour policies and the unreliability of the Alliance. The Alliance, despite being the emerging force fared badly in the first few days, as infighting between candidates who refused to stand down, poor media appearances by Roy Jenkins and a confused opening message put a dent on the Alliance surge.

On the Labour side, the combined prospect of a possible victory (and a heavy defeat if the campaign was badly run) led even the critics of Michael Foot to close ranks in order to fight an effective campaign, and despite heavy media criticism of the Labour manifesto Foot and his inner circle proved surprisingly adept at selling some of its key pledges, doubling down on economics by attempting to seize on the public discontent with high unemployment (particularly thanks to the able performances of Denis Healey, Tony Benn and Peter Shore from the frontbench).

The Conservatives were prepared for a full-scale assault on Michael Foot and his policies to be launched, a strategy which began to unravel when the Daily Mirror ran an exclusive story regarding an affair of Party Chairman Parkinson with his secretary. Initially denying the allegations with indignation, further media scrutiny lead to full exposure in the press and the discovery of further skeletons inside the Conservative Party, turning the Conservative campaign in a series of improvised defences and desperate attacks that failed to harm a rising Labour, with the fiery orator Foot drawing up larger and larger crowds on his economic message of recovery.

An increasingly angry Thatcher had to deal not only with defending Parkinson, but with mounting pressure from the Tory left which warned of an impending landslide. The pressure eventually took its toll with the Prime Minister, leading an exasperated Thatcher to downplay a significant rise in unemployment figures at an interview, and her case was not helped by the staunchest Thatcherites (led by newly appointed Employment Secretary Norman Tebbit) apparently telling unemployed rioters to “get on their bikes” and look for work. As the Conservative poll ratings crashed with Thatcher seen as uncaring and ineffective and with the Alliance making a mess of their own campaign on account of divisions, Foot rode wave after wave of polling rises until, on the eve of the Election Night, Labour polled close to 50%.

The actual result was closer to 54%, and the resulting landslide wave overcame 1931 as the worst defeat of a governing party in the United Kingdom. One by one the Tory party grandees (Wet or Dry) were scalped on live television, including William Whitelaw, Francis Pym, Parkinson, Tebbit, former Prime Minister Ted Heath and, in the most historic of moments, Thatcher herself lost Finchley on live TV after barely breaking 30% of her constituency vote. Her speech was, all things considered, dignified, but it created the tradition of the “Thatcher moment” for the most shocking scalping in every following Election Night. While the Liberal Party did reasonably well and expanded to more than 20 MP’s, the Gang of Four and the SDP was all but wiped out as Bill Rodgers, David Owen and Roy Jenkins lost their seats, leaving Shirley Williams as the sole SDP MP.

The next day an embittered Margaret Thatcher left Downing Street in tears, and amidst adoring crowds Michael Foot entered Number 10.

[MAINEiac4434]

The next day an embittered Margaret Thatcher left Downing Street in tears, and amidst adoring crowds Michael Foot entered Number 10.

Yes. Yes. YES!

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

That was an impressively believable summary, considering the material you had to work with.

[Lumine]

That was an impressively believable summary, considering the material you had to work with.

Thank you, I'm glad it doesn't sound far-fechted. Foot was polling very high before the SDP broke away, so while highly unlikely it is at least a "possible" result.