Gilgal
How Gilgal voted in 2022
94 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| מחל Likud | 29.79% 28 votes |
+6.4 |
| פה Yesh Atid | 21.28% 20 votes |
+3.5 |
| ט Religious Zionist Party | 15.96% 15 votes |
+5.1 |
| כן National Unity | 12.77% 12 votes |
+3.7 |
| אמת מפלגת העבודה בראשות מרב מיכאלי | 5.32% 5 votes |
+1.6 |
| שס Shas | 4.26% 4 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 3 more lists that did not enter the Knesset
These lists got votes here but fell below the national threshold (3.25%), even where their share here was far larger.
| מרצ | מרצ השמאל של ישראל בראשות זהבה גלאון | 5.32% | 5 | +2.2 |
| ב | הבית היהודי בראשות איילת שקד | 4.26% | 4 | +3.1 |
| צ | צעירים בוערים בהנהגת הדר מוכתר | 1.06% | 1 | +0.9 |
What happened to these votes
5 people in Gilgal voted for מרצ השמאל של ישראל בראשות זהבה גלאון. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 5.32% here, 1.7 times its national share. Nationally it stopped at 3.16%, below the 3.25% 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.
94 voters out of 158 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.
Gilgal against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Matta · Ge'a · Giv'at Nili
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Matta | 417 |
| Ge'a | 430 |
| Giv'at Nili | 340 |
| Ofer | 307 |
| Irus | 427 |
| Telalim | 310 |
| Merhavya(Moshav) | 434 |
| Nir Yafe | 333 |
10 elections in Gilgal
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 158 | 94 | 59.5% | −11.1 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 162 | 88 | 54.3% | −13.1 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 155 | 91 | 58.7% | −12.8 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 152 | 89 | 58.6% | −11.3 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 147 | 86 | 58.5% | −10.0 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 132 | 82 | 62.1% | −10.2 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 122 | 70 | 57.4% | −10.4 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 110 | 64 | 58.2% | −4.3 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 68 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 104 | 64 | 61.5% | −4.1 | 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.