And your point is?

I wrote to the New Statesman:
 
I am aching to see whether any reader will have the temerity to write in to point out that Labour's 'worst ever defeat' in 2019 actually saw the party win 600,000 more votes than it did last week in one of its 'best ever' results. This would be the height of churlishness, surely ?
 
I was a little surprised to get a response from the Editor:
 
Dear Colin
Thanks for the note. We appreciate it. 
Your point is well made.
But of course we operate under a first past the post voting system.
No point piling up votes in safe seats if you want to win an election and the lead the country. If we had a different voting system - I support PR - the Labour strategy would have been completely different for the 2024 election. As it stands, they won a landslide and Labour in 2019 recorded their worst defeat since 1935.
Very best wishes, Jason
New Statesman, Editor

I responded:

Thanks Jason for your response. I just thought it would be worth mentioning given how often we hear about Gore beating Bush, Clinton beating Trump - it seems the popular vote gets a mention when it suits. Now it doesn't suit Starmer!
​
There are three ways an election result can be reported—or hailed—the number of members elected or the vote share or of course the actual votes cast. We are asked in the current circumstance to only look at the landslide of members elected. Doing so papers over the clear verdict of the electorate—Starmer’s a dud. There is nevertheless a fair bit of tutting going on in left-centrist circles about the shallowness of the landslide. Maybe that’s the Starmer effect—he depresses support. This will not in anyway affect his ‘clear mandate.’ The last PM who made much of a ‘clear mandate’ was Liz Truss (albeit given to her by a small selection of crackpot Tory party members).

Perhaps it's worth adding that as Jason suggested, the party had a strategy to win where it mattered in 2024. By the way of contrast, the party in 2019 had a strategy to undermine Corbyn at every opportunity, even going so far as to divert resources to right wing candidates. And it should be remembered that the party came out of the 2019 election with a £13 million surplus - so money wasn't spent when it should have been.