YUROP

This cannot be said enough to Anglosphericals, even the well-informed ones sometimes don't get it. Under proportional representation, you almost never "win" an election and that's the point.

It's a classic misunderstanding between two political different cultures. I remember once a German state election, I think it was Baden-Würtemberg, where the first-placed party had no friends so the parties #2 and #3 (the Greens were one) formed the government. The Anglo press just did not get it - a "the losers ganged up on the winners"! How could Germans possibly accept this travesty of democracy??! But the second and third parties agreed on more things, and between them they had far more votes! It was arguably more democratic than the outcome of a classic first-past-the-post election in Britain or the USA.

This silly obsession with winners and losers was why the Tories dominated 20th-century British politics even though Labour and the Liberals often had more support between them. It's arguably what sunk the UK LibDems' referendum on electoral reform under the Cameron government. And then a few years later Brexit got 51.9%, which for Brits was obviously a resounding victory so most of the the other 48.1% didn't even complain about literally losing their EU citizenship. The winner-loser culture goes deep for Anglos but it doesn't always serve them well.