Mavqi'im
How Mavqi'im voted in 2003
108 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| מחל הליכוד עם אריאל שרון לראשות הממשלה | 43.52% 47 votes |
+14.1 |
| אמת העבודה - מימד בראשות מצנע | 30.56% 33 votes |
+16.1 |
| יש שינוי מפלגת החילונים ומעמד הביניים | 13.89% 15 votes |
+1.6 |
| מרצ מרצ - הבחירה הדמוקרטית - שחר | 3.70% 4 votes |
−1.5 |
| ל האיחוד הלאומי ישראל ביתנו - מולדת תקומה | 2.78% 3 votes |
−2.7 |
| שס שס - התאחדות הספרדים העולמית שומרי תורה | 2.78% 3 votes |
−5.4 |
"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 2 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 | 1.85% | 2 | +1.4 |
| קנ | עלה ירוק | 0.93% | 1 | −0.3 |
What happened to these votes
2 people in Mavqi'im voted for הירוקים. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 1.85% here, 4.5 times its national share. Nationally it stopped at 0.41%, below the 1.5% 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.
109 voters out of 136 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.
Mavqi'im against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: En HaShofet · Shoval · Daliyya
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| En HaShofet | 477 |
| Shoval | 327 |
| Daliyya | 487 |
| Yotvata | 344 |
| Hofit | 503 |
| כפר אז"ר | 314 |
| Kefar HaNasi | 304 |
| En Wered | 509 |
10 elections in Mavqi'im
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 390 | 296 | 75.9% | +5.3 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 370 | 266 | 71.9% | +4.5 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 369 | 284 | 77.0% | +5.4 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 372 | 274 | 73.7% | +3.8 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 368 | 276 | 75.0% | +6.5 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 297 | 233 | 78.5% | +6.1 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 284 | 187 | 65.8% | −1.9 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 239 | 158 | 66.1% | +3.6 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 106 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 136 | 109 | 80.1% | +14.5 | 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.