Nada como um respeitado tory para esclarecer as coisas:

Bruce Anderson sobre o Boris:

A few weeks ago, prominent Tories were asking themselves which would be worse: Boris losing or Boris winning. Even on Friday, as the scale of the Labour defeat became apparent, some Tories wondered whether it would matter if Boris was defeated. (...)

At the beginning of Boris's campaign, some of his own advisers sounded like a housemaster's report from a generation ago. "Boris has shown signs of improvement. I only had to beat him three times this term. But he is still far too ready to play the fool. On a bad day, he can be a bigger nuisance than any boy in the school." (...)

«He does have core instincts: three of them, two attractive. He is a libertarian and a hedonist; he is in favour of everyone having a good time, especially himself. But he is not a Tory. There is no reverence for institutions or tradition: no interest in history. Tories approach British history with a mixture of sentimentality, allegiance and hard thinking. Boris's response to that would be derisive laughter. If he were 10 years younger, he could easily have been seduced by Tony Blair, another man who uses charm as a substitute for intellect and reliability.

Boris's third, less attractive core instinct is selfishness. Just below the bumbling exterior lies a ruthless ambition and an almost complete lack of interest in anyone else's well-being. Up to now, he has been able to get away with this by exploiting his charm. Over the years, Boris has convinced himself that he can charm his way out of any blunder, any inconvenient commitment, any deception. To be fair to him, it has worked: thus far. (...)

This weekend, some Labour MPs were finding consolation – in Boris. A year from now, they hope to be saying: "Twelve months ago, the voters of London chose an Etonian, a toff twit in a Bullingdon Club tailcoat, to be their Mayor. They would not vote that way today. The country should not repeat their mistake."