Ma'ale Amos
How Ma'ale Amos voted in 2021
286 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| ג יהדות התורה והשבת אגודת ישראל – דגל התורה | 53.15% 152 votes |
+47.5 |
| ט הציונות הדתית בראשות בצלאל סמוטריץ' | 25.17% 72 votes |
+20.1 |
| שס התאחדות הספרדים שומרי תורה תנועתו של מרן הרב עובדיה יוסף זצ"ל | 9.09% 26 votes |
+1.9 |
| ב ימינה בראשות נפתלי בנט | 6.99% 20 votes |
+0.8 |
| מחל הליכוד בהנהגת בנימין נתניהו לראשות הממשלה | 3.85% 11 votes |
−20.3 |
| מרצ מרצ – השמאל של ישראל | 0.35% 1 votes |
−4.2 |
| פה יש עתיד בראשות יאיר לפיד | 0.35% 1 votes |
−13.6 |
| ת תקווה חדשה בהנהגת גדעון סער לראשות הממשלה | 0.35% 1 votes |
−4.4 |
"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 (3.25%), even where their share here was far larger.
| ר | רפא – רק בריאות בראשות דוקטור אריה אבני | 0.70% | 2 | +0.3 |
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.
286 voters out of 381 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 a stable position in only one election.
Ma'ale Amos against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Bet Hilqiyya · Brukhin · Yizhar
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Bet Hilqiyya | 390 |
| Brukhin | 474 |
| Yizhar | 564 |
| Bne Dkalim | 536 |
| Tifrah | 881 |
| Itamar | 434 |
| Qiryat Netafim | 359 |
| Ma'ale Levona | 334 |
10 elections in Ma'ale Amos
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 431 | 326 | 75.6% | +5.0 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 381 | 286 | 75.1% | +7.6 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 364 | 279 | 76.6% | +5.1 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 341 | 251 | 73.6% | +3.7 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 320 | 243 | 75.9% | +7.5 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 230 | 163 | 70.9% | −1.5 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 214 | 155 | 72.4% | +4.7 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 170 | 108 | 63.5% | +1.0 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 103 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 143 | 84 | 58.7% | −6.9 | 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.