Not sure if this has been discussed here, but is there any opinion on why Scottish Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dems should/should not gather within one, somewhat progressive, party to oppose the SNP? Frankly, I just see the handwriting on the wall that Scotland will effectively be a one party state until they force independence. I get that politics, especially in Europe, does not have to fit into a neat, two party system. But would Scottish Labour and Conservatives really prefer letting SNP dominate for the foreseeable future rather than working together in a big tent coalition?
The short answer is yes.
To flesh that out a bit, quite apart from the uncertainty of the political positioning of such an arrangement (which party south of the border does a 'Unionist' party align itself with, and what kind of policies does a party that is an amalgam of the traditional three main parties of the UK put forth), most Labour and Conservative politicians and members would rather eat glass than be part of the same political party. The fact is, ultimately, aside from so-called swing voters, each party really and truly caters to a different type of person, and such people are not going to be comfortable with the idea of being forced into an artificial new party. Quite apart from that, campaigning on an explicitly 'unionist' platform, as the Labour party has, has certainly not done it any electoral favours, with the possible exception of gaining a handful of loan votes from the other anti-nationalist parties in a desperate attempt to stop the SNP juggernaut. I simply can't see a unionist party, one that would be riven by internal uncertainty over its policy direction and probably divided along old party lines doing any better than Labour is. It would probably be doing even worse.
