The White House:  Bush or Kerry's future residence?

As America goes to the polls, British politicians are waiting for a result that could have a major impact on domestic politics.

With opinion polls consistently suggesting that the outcome is too close to call, whether President Bush or Senator Kerry emerge victorious may not become clear until the small hours of tomorrow morning.

And, if there are close results in key seats, legal challenges could delay the outcome for days or weeks in a repeat of the 2000 fiasco.

Much speculation has centred on whether Tony Blair would prefer a Bush or Kerry victory.

Some analysts suggest the prime minister wants Bush to win, as he fears being isolated as the only major surviving leader of the pro-war coalition.

Others, including the vast majority of Labour backbenchers, argue that a Kerry presidency would ease tensions in the party by ending Blair's close relationship with a right-wing conservative White House which has a patchy record on areas such as the environment.

But Kerry has pledged to defend American national security interests as vigorously as the current president, and has also angered British ministers with his early pledges to protect US jobs from outsourcing to poorer countries.

Meanwhile, the election has also caused problems for the Conservatives with the party effectively in a no-win situation.

The prime minister's closeness to the Bush administration resulted in Michael Howard reportedly being barred from the White House following his criticism of the Iraq war.

But the Conservative leader could also find his general election campaign undermined if a transatlantic trend away from the right emerges from the US election.

Tory foreign affairs spokesman Alan Duncan is among those MPs backing Kerry's campaign.

"I would like to see a less muscular American foreign policy," he told BBC Radio on Tuesday.

"I think if John Kerry were to win today, in the eyes of a lot of people there would be an immediate change of mood which would clear the slate somewhat.

"A more thoughtful foreign policy, I think, would be welcome now, because terrorism is a very complicated phenomenon and to approach it in a simplistic way can risk compounding the difficulties of tackling it."