Qelahim
How Qelahim voted in 2003
126 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| אמת העבודה - מימד בראשות מצנע | 35.71% 45 votes |
+21.3 |
| שס שס - התאחדות הספרדים העולמית שומרי תורה | 28.57% 36 votes |
+20.3 |
| מחל הליכוד עם אריאל שרון לראשות הממשלה | 17.46% 22 votes |
−11.9 |
| ם עם אחד בראשות עמיר פרץ | 9.52% 12 votes |
+6.8 |
| ב המפד"ל - המפלגה הדתית לאומית, המזרחי - הפועל המזרחי בארץ ישראל | 2.38% 3 votes |
−1.8 |
| ג יהדות התורה והשבת אגודת ישראל - דגל התורה | 2.38% 3 votes |
−1.9 |
| יש שינוי מפלגת החילונים ומעמד הביניים | 0.79% 1 votes |
−11.5 |
| ל האיחוד הלאומי ישראל ביתנו - מולדת תקומה | 0.79% 1 votes |
−4.7 |
| מרצ מרצ - הבחירה הדמוקרטית - שחר | 0.79% 1 votes |
−4.4 |
| עם הרשימה הערבית המאוחדת | 0.79% 1 votes |
−1.3 |
"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 (1.5%), even where their share here was far larger.
| רק | הירוקים | 0.79% | 1 | +0.4 |
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.
127 voters out of 202 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.
Qelahim against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Migdal · En Harod (Ihud) · Ahisamakh
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Migdal | 593 |
| En Harod (Ihud) | 382 |
| Ahisamakh | 419 |
| Hazav | 413 |
| Biriyya | 341 |
| Yinnon | 416 |
| Bet HaGaddi | 306 |
| Pattish | 361 |
10 elections in Qelahim
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 383 | 299 | 78.1% | +7.4 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 373 | 279 | 74.8% | +7.4 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 365 | 301 | 82.5% | +10.9 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 357 | 286 | 80.1% | +10.2 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 350 | 291 | 83.1% | +14.7 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 323 | 250 | 77.4% | +5.1 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 289 | 213 | 73.7% | +5.9 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 219 | 147 | 67.1% | +4.6 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 134 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 202 | 127 | 62.9% | −2.7 | 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.