Allone HaBashan
How Allone HaBashan voted in 2015
156 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| טב הבית היהודי בראשות נפתלי בנט | 56.41% 88 votes |
+49.7 |
| מחל הליכוד בהנהגת בנימין נתניהו לראשות הממשלה | 28.21% 44 votes |
+4.8 |
| כ כולנו בראשות משה כחלון | 4.49% 7 votes |
−3.0 |
| פה יש עתיד בראשות יאיר לפיד | 1.28% 2 votes |
−7.5 |
| אמת המחנה הציוני בראשות יצחק הרצוג וציפי לבני | 0.64% 1 votes |
−18.0 |
"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 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.
| קץ | יחד — העם איתנו בראשות אלי ישי | 8.97% | 14 | +6.0 |
What happened to these votes
14 people in Allone HaBashan voted for יחד — העם איתנו בראשות אלי ישי. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 8.97% here, 3.0 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.
156 voters out of 184 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.
Allone HaBashan against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: En Zurim · En HaEmeq · Kefar Ya'bez
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| En Zurim | 426 |
| En HaEmeq | 416 |
| Kefar Ya'bez | 374 |
| Dolev | 608 |
| Noqedim | 756 |
| Eshta'ol | 548 |
| Kefar Hoshen | 393 |
| Porat | 563 |
10 elections in Allone HaBashan
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 237 | 162 | 68.4% | −2.3 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 213 | 151 | 70.9% | +3.5 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 221 | 152 | 68.8% | −2.7 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 223 | 166 | 74.4% | +4.6 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 217 | 159 | 73.3% | +4.8 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 184 | 156 | 84.8% | +12.4 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 168 | 140 | 83.3% | +15.6 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 143 | 114 | 79.7% | +17.2 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 86 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 90 | 78 | 86.7% | +21.1 | 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.