Ayanot
How Ayanot voted in 2009
34 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| כן קדימה – עם ציפי לבני לראשות הממשלה | 29.41% 10 votes |
+6.9 |
| אמת העבודה בראשות אהוד ברק | 14.71% 5 votes |
+4.8 |
| ל ישראל ביתנו בראשות אביגדור ליברמן | 14.71% 5 votes |
+3.0 |
| מחל הליכוד – אח"י בהנהגת בנימין נתניהו לראשות הממשלה | 14.71% 5 votes |
−6.9 |
| מרצ התנועה החדשה מרצ | 11.76% 4 votes |
+8.8 |
"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 3 more lists that did not enter the Knesset
These lists got votes here but fell below the national threshold (2.0%), even where their share here was far larger.
| קנ | עלה ירוק | 5.88% | 2 | +5.5 |
| רק | הירוקים – למען ישראל ירוקה | 5.88% | 2 | +5.5 |
| צי | צבר – מפלגת הצעירים של ישראל | 2.94% | 1 | +2.8 |
What happened to these votes
2 people in Ayanot voted for עלה ירוק. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 5.88% here, 15.1 times its national share. Nationally it stopped at 0.39%, below the 2.0% 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.
34 voters out of 65 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.
Ayanot against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Hazor-Ashdod · En Dor · Kefar Blum
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 15 times the number of valid votes).
| Hazor-Ashdod | 423 |
| En Dor | 403 |
| Kefar Blum | 356 |
| Bet HaEmeq | 311 |
| Nir Dawid (Tel Amal) | 401 |
| Mizra | 465 |
| Allone Abba | 344 |
| Sha'ar HaAmaqim | 404 |
10 elections in Ayanot
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 146 | 46 | 31.5% | −39.1 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 129 | 42 | 32.6% | −34.9 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 115 | 50 | 43.5% | −28.0 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 136 | 53 | 39.0% | −30.9 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 109 | 53 | 48.6% | −19.8 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 88 | 52 | 59.1% | −13.2 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 77 | 54 | 70.1% | +2.4 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 65 | 34 | 52.3% | −10.2 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 33 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 54 | 27 | 50.0% | −15.6 | 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.