Ma'ale Amos
How Ma'ale Amos voted in 2022
324 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| ג United Torah Judaism | 48.46% 157 votes |
+42.6 |
| ט Religious Zionist Party | 32.41% 105 votes |
+21.6 |
| שס Shas | 11.11% 36 votes |
+2.9 |
| מחל Likud | 4.63% 15 votes |
−18.8 |
| פה Yesh Atid | 0.93% 3 votes |
−16.9 |
| כן National Unity | 0.62% 2 votes |
−8.5 |
"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.
| ב | הבית היהודי בראשות איילת שקד | 1.54% | 5 | +0.4 |
| נק | יש כיוון בראשות עמוס דב סילבר | 0.31% | 1 | +0.3 |
What happened to these votes
5 people in Ma'ale Amos voted for הבית היהודי בראשות איילת שקד. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 1.54% here, 1.3 times its national share. Nationally it stopped at 1.19%, 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.
326 voters out of 431 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: Mattityahu · Qiryat Netafim · Alumma
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Mattityahu | 374 |
| Qiryat Netafim | 388 |
| Alumma | 531 |
| Shalwa | 351 |
| Avne Hefez | 1,044 |
| Bne Dkalim | 625 |
| Ma'ale Levona | 351 |
| Itamar | 492 |
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.