Yitav
Also recorded by the Central Elections Committee as ייטב
How Yitav voted in 2015
137 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| ל ישראל ביתנו בראשות אביגדור ליברמן | 37.96% 52 votes |
+32.9 |
| טב הבית היהודי בראשות נפתלי בנט | 35.77% 49 votes |
+29.0 |
| מחל הליכוד בהנהגת בנימין נתניהו לראשות הממשלה | 8.03% 11 votes |
−15.4 |
| כ כולנו בראשות משה כחלון | 2.92% 4 votes |
−4.6 |
| ג יהדות התורה והשבת אגודת ישראל – דגל התורה | 1.46% 2 votes |
−3.5 |
"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 (3.25%), even where their share here was far larger.
| קץ | יחד — העם איתנו בראשות אלי ישי | 10.95% | 15 | +8.0 |
| קנ | עלה ירוק - גאה בבחירה שלי | 2.92% | 4 | +1.8 |
What happened to these votes
15 people in Yitav voted for יחד — העם איתנו בראשות אלי ישי. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 10.95% here, 3.7 times its national share. Nationally it stopped at 2.97%, 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.
138 voters out of 168 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.
Yitav against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Yish'i | 399 |
| Berekhya | 591 |
| Neve Tsuf | 629 |
| Ozem | 322 |
| Shave Shomeron | 408 |
| Enav | 357 |
| Bat Ayin | 524 |
| Kefar Zetim | 319 |
10 elections in Yitav
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 270 | 186 | 68.9% | −1.7 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 236 | 162 | 68.6% | +1.2 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 205 | 160 | 78.0% | +6.5 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 209 | 162 | 77.5% | +7.6 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 204 | 164 | 80.4% | +11.9 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 168 | 138 | 82.1% | +9.8 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 152 | 120 | 78.9% | +11.2 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 121 | 92 | 76.0% | +13.5 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 80 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 83 | 67 | 80.7% | +15.1 | 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.