Two years ago, New Labour’s Tessa Jowell made the foolish error of believing the British could successfully graft a European mainland licensing regime onto a binge-drinking culture. Already overworked police and A&E staff have been paying for her folly ever since.

Throughout yesterday, I watched laptops and TV screens in horror as soi-disant political academics blithely insisted that Italian and Spanish approaches to post-election compromise would be a doddle for British politicos to adopt. What, they asked, were we afraid of?

I was corresponding with a source during the day, an anglophile American who in many ways understands us better than we understand ourselves. Her thesis was that you overlay a consensual Coalition approach onto an adversarial political process at your peril. I think this is smack-bang on the money. And it instantly reminded me of why the Jowell 24/7 drink law fiasco was doomed to failure from the start.

Most continental European countries have built their electoral systems around consensus, whether consciously or not. It is accepted in Italy, for example, that a Communist Party will have at least some things in common with a Blairish Social Democrat grouping. In Britain it couldn’t be contemplated – any more than a deal between the Tories and the BNP could.

British politics are infinitely more tribal, and the tribal warfare visceral. This isn’t true in the cosy club called Westminster; but it most definitely is among the constituency wonks.

Just over two years ago I posted a blog at LibDemVoice, the grassroots vehicle of the Liberal Democrats. It suggested that for true Liberals (ie, without the SDP bit) the commonality between them and the Conservative Party was obvious: anti big State, pro small business, into Green in general and communities in particular.

The vitriol turned on me for even suggesting such a thing would’ve made a sergeant-major blush. And it’s no better among the Tory faithful: never mind Nick Clegg, quite a few of them think Cameron is a dangerous Leftie.

Notable in among Brown’s magisterial blessings from Downing Street yesterday (following a comprehensive hammering at the hands of the electorate) was that a joint effort by Labour and Tory wasn’t even thought about – and certainly not mentioned. Yet in Spain – with the ripples already arriving there from Greece – this is precisely what the two Left and Right leaders have agreed upon.

Ours truly are adversarial politics. It would be the same in the States, where the only thing the GOP and the Democrats agree about is that you salute the flag and respect the Office of the President. Even in Germany, while there are arrangements made all the time, Anglo-Saxon rigidity rules: the Social and Christian Democrats don’t like each other much, and at the moment Frau Merkel is taking a pasting in the Bundestag from the Opposition leader – who is, as we’d expect here in Britain, playing to the German gallery about giving money away to Greeks.

Yesterday I wrote three things of significance which sort of floated on a sea of confusion – mine by the way, rather than anyone else’s. First, that this pernicious Labour creation of an environment (in which the election result could be perverted for their own ends) has been scripted from the kick-off – with at least some collusion from the LibDems. Second, that Nick Clegg may well be playing at getting Tory agreement – as a way of this being seen as ‘permission’ to then talk to Labour. And third, that it looked to me like we were heading for a Tory/LibDem coalition.

Veteran readers will know that The Slog has been running pieces about LabLib cooperation (centred on the Anyone But Gordon group rather than Number Ten) since well before Clegg’s resultant success in getting Brown in front of Chilcot. But now, both wings within Labour have formed a do-or-die circle around the Prime Minister. They are desperate to do a deal on voting reform – but Clegg is (I know for certain) equally desperate to avoid being seen to shake hands with Brown on a coalition. The Unbrowning of Labour is getting more difficult for the Party to swallow with every day that passes.

As for the discussions taking place at the moment, every source I have is on silent running well below the waves. This is partly that they don’t know anything, and partly that they know when to shut up. Like I said, British politics are tribal…and at the moment everyone’s in the stockade. The lack of any inkling in the media (at 7.30 am UK time) suggests that nobody is leaking – yet.

But a Tory/LibDem coalition would be one helluva smelly fish for Clegg to sell to his activists. And anyway, he may be simply going through the motions. Soon the leaking will start…and the Mandelson machine will get to work at changing reality.

We said a week ago that tribalism would make post-election agreements nasty and brutish, but definitely not short. Even if one were to be concluded, there is too much difference on policy here (whatever the unpleasant Charlie Whelan says) for either of Clegg’s options to work for long.

Above all, there is one overwhelming reason why, for now, British politics cannot possibly be consensual: the electorate overwhelmingly rejected Brown, and didn’t turn up for Nick Clegg. The Conservatives know this, Simon Schama knows this, and Nick Robinson knows this. It is conceivable that Labour’s election-theft script could yet be made into a major production – but very unlikely.