HaMa'pil
How HaMa'pil voted in 2019
472 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| פה כחול לבן - בראשות בני גנץ ויאיר לפיד | 51.48% 243 votes |
+25.5 |
| מרצ המחנה הדמוקרטי בהנהגת הורוביץ, שפיר וברק | 31.36% 148 votes |
+27.0 |
| אמת העבודה - גשר בראשות עמיר פרץ ואורלי לוי אבקסיס | 8.26% 39 votes |
+3.5 |
| מחל הליכוד בהנהגת בנימין נתניהו לראשות הממשלה | 4.87% 23 votes |
−20.2 |
| טב ימינה בראשות איילת שקד הבית היהודי-האיחוד הלאומי-הימין החדש | 1.91% 9 votes |
−4.0 |
| ל ישראל ביתנו בראשות אביגדור ליברמן | 1.27% 6 votes |
−5.7 |
| ג יהדות התורה והשבת אגודת ישראל - דגל התורה | 0.42% 2 votes |
−5.6 |
| שס התאחדות הספרדים שומרי התורה תנועתו של מרן הרב עובדיה יוסף זצ"ל | 0.21% 1 votes |
−7.2 |
"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.
| נ | מתקדמת | 0.21% | 1 | +0.2 |
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.
473 voters out of 630 eligible.
The line is the locality's path across the elections; the filled dot is the latest.
The position is derived from locality-level results and describes a place, not people. Movement on the map does not show that particular voters changed their vote.
HaMa'pil against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Bet Yizhaq-Sh. Hefer · Karme Yosef · Bet Lehem HaGelilit
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Bet Yizhaq-Sh. Hefer | 1,236 |
| Karme Yosef | 1,074 |
| Bet Lehem HaGelilit | 462 |
| Kefar Sirkin | 804 |
| Yoqne'am(Moshava) | 771 |
| En HaNaziv | 311 |
| Aseret | 686 |
| En Wered | 877 |
10 elections in HaMa'pil
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 651 | 483 | 74.2% | +3.6 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 641 | 477 | 74.4% | +7.0 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 636 | 494 | 77.7% | +6.2 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 630 | 473 | 75.1% | +5.2 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 626 | 484 | 77.3% | +8.9 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 571 | 440 | 77.1% | +4.7 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 566 | 444 | 78.4% | +10.7 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 451 | 320 | 71.0% | +8.4 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 303 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 406 | 305 | 75.1% | +9.5 | 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.