National leader Bill English was all smiles on election night as his party won 46 percent of the preliminary vote.
But under MMP, that number doesn't matter, as it wasn't enough to govern alone and there were no willing partners to form a coalition.
- 'No such thing' as moral majority - politics professor
- A brief history of New Zealand's MMP governments
It's a decision that's drawn controversy online; labelled a 'coalition of losers' by some with memes circulating online blaming MMP for delivering a government "no one voted for".
Even National's Northland MP Matt King hit out at MMP today in a Facebook post accusing the system of denying his party a win and putting the 'losing block' into power.
He has since deleted the post.
Elsewhere there is growing concern that comments such as King's could undermine the political process.
Bronwyn Hayward, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Canterbury, said the key is "getting to that maturity of actually thinking, in a democracy, we don't always get what we want".
But is MMP what we want?
The system's been around for eight elections now - replacing first-past-the-post (FFP) for the 1996 election.
Prof Hayward says "one of the reasons we changed the system, back in '93, was a growing frustration from the public that single parties without a total majority were able to lead in government".
Many people do agree there should be changes to the current system.
Two recommendations in a review of MMP suggested lowering the five percent threshold to four percent to help minor parties get into parliament, and ditching the coat-tailing clause which gives list members a ticket to parliament if their party wins an electorate seat.
But it appears the current system's here to stay - the new government has no plans to change it.
Newshub.
