Ray: little brokering was needed. Boris's overall majority was 140,000 with first and second votes combined. In "gin and jag" Bexley and Bromley Boris got a first vote majority of over 80,000, ie more than half his majority, thanks to Tory focus on the suburban turnout. See Boulton's analysis: http://adamboulton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/05/joke-boris-has.html

'A warning for the coming general election, the Conservatives spent their money well in the suburbs and this suggests that their targeting of the marginals will have a big impact on the House of Commons whenever the election is called.'

I doubt it - Tory voters are more likely than Labour voters to turn out already. There aren't that many additional voters to get to the polling stations. London-wide elections were anomalous in this, as apparently (and I don't have the figures, so correct me if I'm wrong) suburban voters perceived that the mayor and assembly concentrated only on central London, and were therefore irrelevant to them, so they didn't vote. 'Correcting' this might well have granted Boris victory, but I don't see how it could be repeated in a general election.

Count yourselves lucky that you didn't have a fiasco like the last Scottish election.

"this suggests that their targeting of the marginals will have a big impact on the House of Commons whenever the election is called."

Not sure about this - this is a PR vote, whereas the marginals will be decided by FPTP.

In a PR election like this one, you have to do a lot of brokering, trying to get people's second vote etc, whereas in FPTP, that counts for nothing.