In general people who demonise Thatcher largely agree with her on many policies. They are generally pro EU (she campaigned to remain in the referendum on EEC membership in 1975), they are usually opposed to reopening coal mines, or nationalising BP (or BA or JLR) or making telecommunications a state owned monopoly. To be fair they might favour nationalising utilities and train operating companies, but that is about it. They rarely disagree with her that climate change risks "irretrievable damage to the atmosphere, to the oceans, to earth itself", and are unlikely to want to bring back the use of CFCs.

It seems to me that no person who makes any tough choices for the society could possibly be remembered well unless they live into the period of prosperity that follows.

For example, it is popular to talk about how bad the US debt servicing (15% of the federal budget) is, or the looming social security crisis, or the pension crisis and so on. But if someone raised the social security eligibility age or changed many pensions from defined benefit to defined contribution they would be villainized. Proposition 13 is often pointed to as a source of bad Californian incentives, but anyone who runs on repealing it will ruin their political career.

To say nothing of anyone who could possibly dare to oppose FARS rules, advocate for single-stair buildings, or allow insurance companies to charge sufficiently that they can operate in California.

Thatcher closed the mines and Trump wants to open the mines, so at least one of them must be loved for it. But predictably, neither are.