Harashim
How Harashim voted in 2003
73 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| מרצ מרצ - הבחירה הדמוקרטית - שחר | 47.95% 35 votes |
+42.7 |
| אמת העבודה - מימד בראשות מצנע | 36.99% 27 votes |
+22.5 |
| יש שינוי מפלגת החילונים ומעמד הביניים | 5.48% 4 votes |
−6.8 |
| ו החזית הדמוקרטית לשלום ולשוויון (המפלגה הקומוניסטית הישראלית וחוגי ציבור יהודים וערבים) והתנועה הערבית להתחדשות | 2.74% 2 votes |
−0.2 |
| ם עם אחד בראשות עמיר פרץ | 1.37% 1 votes |
−1.4 |
| מחל הליכוד עם אריאל שרון לראשות הממשלה | 1.37% 1 votes |
−28.0 |
"Against national" is the gap, in percentage points, from the national result in the same election. It is what turns the number into an answer.
Show 1 more lists that did not enter the Knesset
These lists got votes here but fell below the national threshold (1.5%), even where their share here was far larger.
| קנ | עלה ירוק | 4.11% | 3 | +2.9 |
What happened to these votes
3 people in Harashim voted for עלה ירוק. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 4.11% here, 3.4 times its national share. Nationally it stopped at 1.20%, below the 1.5% threshold, and won no seats.
Download the data: CSV · JSON — every election, not only the one in the table. UTF-8 with a BOM, so that Excel shows Hebrew correctly.
74 voters out of 95 eligible.
There is no path here. The map places a locality only in elections where at least 300 valid votes were counted; below that, a handful of ballots moves a whole percentage point and the position would be noise, not a finding. This locality has no stable position in any election.
Harashim against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Ramot Menashe · Nir Yizhaq · Yaqum
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Ramot Menashe | 325 |
| Nir Yizhaq | 341 |
| Yaqum | 350 |
| Elon | 355 |
| Maggal | 321 |
| Kefar Menahem | 361 |
| Amir | 348 |
| Hanni'el | 347 |
10 elections in Harashim
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 249 | 187 | 75.1% | +4.5 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 235 | 186 | 79.1% | +11.7 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 219 | 166 | 75.8% | +4.3 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 223 | 172 | 77.1% | +7.3 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 224 | 182 | 81.2% | +12.8 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 192 | 143 | 74.5% | +2.1 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 177 | 129 | 72.9% | +5.1 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 157 | 117 | 74.5% | +12.0 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 89 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 95 | 74 | 77.9% | +12.3 | The results → |
In years when the Central Elections Committee published no count of eligible voters by locality there is no turnout, and the line breaks there. It is not filled in by guesswork.