Is a narrow loss for Boris the best outcome for the Tories?

Feeling a bit Machiavellian this morning I was musing over the outcome of the London elections on the run up to the next general election. The problem for the Tories is that they need to be in a position to challenge Gordon's incompetence at every turn without having their flanks exposed and in the case MacMillan may have been very prescient.

Boris may end up being a good mayor but he is taking over in what is starting to look like a rapid slow down if not recession. This means significant cuts will need to be found and every time something goes wrong – a child in care is murdered by parents who were being watched by social services for example – Boris will get the blame. The Tories opponents will then be able to use this during the run up to an election as a proof of Tory incompetence. I'll go further and say that Gordon will put the squeeze on London's budgets to make it harder for Boris.

What may be better for the Tories is a very narrow win for Ken and then maybe lots of vote rigging scandals coming to light in the next 12 months. Surely its better that Ken, and by extension Labour, are in the spotlight every time there is a cock-up?