Giv'at Oz
How Giv'at Oz voted in 2021
247 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| מרצ מרצ – השמאל של ישראל | 24.70% 61 votes |
+20.1 |
| פה יש עתיד בראשות יאיר לפיד | 24.29% 60 votes |
+10.4 |
| אמת מפלגת העבודה בראשות מרב מיכאלי | 18.62% 46 votes |
+12.5 |
| כן כחול לבן בראשות בני גנץ | 15.38% 38 votes |
+8.8 |
| מחל הליכוד בהנהגת בנימין נתניהו לראשות הממשלה | 5.67% 14 votes |
−18.5 |
| ב ימינה בראשות נפתלי בנט | 4.45% 11 votes |
−1.8 |
| ל ישראל ביתנו בראשות אביגדור ליברמן | 4.45% 11 votes |
−1.2 |
| ת תקווה חדשה בהנהגת גדעון סער לראשות הממשלה | 1.62% 4 votes |
−3.1 |
| ג יהדות התורה והשבת אגודת ישראל – דגל התורה | 0.40% 1 votes |
−5.2 |
"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.
| יז | הכלכלית החדשה בראשות פרופסור ירון זליכה | 0.40% | 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.
247 voters out of 398 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.
Giv'at Oz against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Nir Eliyyahu · Mizra · Karkom
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Nir Eliyyahu | 321 |
| Mizra | 507 |
| Karkom | 303 |
| Bahan | 488 |
| Kefar Gil'adi | 356 |
| Bet HaEmeq | 359 |
| Hazerim | 616 |
| Kefar Yedidya | 389 |
10 elections in Giv'at Oz
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 409 | 255 | 62.3% | −8.3 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 398 | 247 | 62.1% | −5.4 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 401 | 257 | 64.1% | −7.4 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 406 | 272 | 67.0% | −2.9 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 410 | 279 | 68.0% | −0.4 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 398 | 269 | 67.6% | −4.8 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 407 | 270 | 66.3% | −1.4 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 372 | 265 | 71.2% | +8.7 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 242 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 374 | 253 | 67.6% | +2.0 | 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.