Newe Etan
How Newe Etan voted in 2003
143 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| אמת העבודה - מימד בראשות מצנע | 56.64% 81 votes |
+42.2 |
| יש שינוי מפלגת החילונים ומעמד הביניים | 14.69% 21 votes |
+2.4 |
| מרצ מרצ - הבחירה הדמוקרטית - שחר | 11.89% 17 votes |
+6.7 |
| מחל הליכוד עם אריאל שרון לראשות הממשלה | 9.09% 13 votes |
−20.3 |
| ל האיחוד הלאומי ישראל ביתנו - מולדת תקומה | 1.40% 2 votes |
−4.1 |
| ג יהדות התורה והשבת אגודת ישראל - דגל התורה | 0.70% 1 votes |
−3.6 |
"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 | 5.59% | 8 | +4.4 |
What happened to these votes
8 people in Newe Etan voted for עלה ירוק. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 5.59% here, 4.7 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.
144 voters out of 199 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.
Newe Etan against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Avihayil · Bet Zera · Kefar HaNasi
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Avihayil | 592 |
| Bet Zera | 392 |
| Kefar HaNasi | 304 |
| Hazerim | 524 |
| Allon HaGalil | 330 |
| Bet She'arim | 313 |
| Giv'at Hayyim(Me'uhad) | 601 |
| Kabri | 514 |
10 elections in Newe Etan
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 190 | 119 | 62.6% | −8.0 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 184 | 108 | 58.7% | −8.7 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 191 | 125 | 65.4% | −6.1 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 186 | 117 | 62.9% | −7.0 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 188 | 122 | 64.9% | −3.6 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 229 | 141 | 61.6% | −10.8 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 212 | 133 | 62.7% | −5.0 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 215 | 141 | 65.6% | +3.1 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 126 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 199 | 144 | 72.4% | +6.8 | 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.