Lotan
How Lotan voted in 2003
64 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| אמת העבודה - מימד בראשות מצנע | 37.50% 24 votes |
+23.0 |
| מרצ מרצ - הבחירה הדמוקרטית - שחר | 32.81% 21 votes |
+27.6 |
| יש שינוי מפלגת החילונים ומעמד הביניים | 6.25% 4 votes |
−6.0 |
| ם עם אחד בראשות עמיר פרץ | 3.12% 2 votes |
+0.4 |
| מחל הליכוד עם אריאל שרון לראשות הממשלה | 3.12% 2 votes |
−26.3 |
| ל האיחוד הלאומי ישראל ביתנו - מולדת תקומה | 1.56% 1 votes |
−4.0 |
"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 2 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 | 12.50% | 8 | +11.3 |
| רק | הירוקים | 3.12% | 2 | +2.7 |
What happened to these votes
8 people in Lotan voted for עלה ירוק. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 12.50% here, 10.4 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.
64 voters out of 120 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.
Lotan against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Kefar Szold · Midreshet Ben Gurion · Dorot
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Kefar Szold | 309 |
| Midreshet Ben Gurion | 318 |
| Dorot | 308 |
| Ramat HaShofet | 320 |
| Kefar Netter | 303 |
| Bet She'arim | 313 |
| Bet Lehem HaGelilit | 312 |
| Bet Hanan | 320 |
10 elections in Lotan
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 179 | 96 | 53.6% | −17.0 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 166 | 97 | 58.4% | −9.0 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 158 | 87 | 55.1% | −16.5 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 159 | 90 | 56.6% | −13.3 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 171 | 93 | 54.4% | −14.1 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 138 | 85 | 61.6% | −10.7 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 119 | 73 | 61.3% | −6.4 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 132 | 84 | 63.6% | +1.1 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 81 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 120 | 64 | 53.3% | −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.