Shibbolim
How Shibbolim voted in 2022
216 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| מחל Likud | 50.93% 110 votes |
+27.5 |
| ט Religious Zionist Party | 28.70% 62 votes |
+17.9 |
| שס Shas | 6.02% 13 votes |
−2.2 |
| כן National Unity | 5.56% 12 votes |
−3.5 |
| ג United Torah Judaism | 1.85% 4 votes |
−4.0 |
| פה Yesh Atid | 1.85% 4 votes |
−15.9 |
| ל Yisrael Beiteinu | 1.39% 3 votes |
−3.1 |
"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 (3.25%), even where their share here was far larger.
| ב | הבית היהודי בראשות איילת שקד | 3.24% | 7 | +2.0 |
| יז | הכלכלית החדשה בראשות פרופסור ירון זליכה | 0.46% | 1 | +0.2 |
What happened to these votes
7 people in Shibbolim voted for הבית היהודי בראשות איילת שקד. None of them elected anyone.
The list took 3.24% here, 2.7 times its national share. Nationally it stopped at 1.19%, 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.
216 voters out of 282 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.
Shibbolim against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Hafez Hayyim · Bar Yohay · Haspin
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Hafez Hayyim | 307 |
| Bar Yohay | 473 |
| Haspin | 644 |
| Enav | 459 |
| Ben Zakkay | 490 |
| Otni'el | 346 |
| Kokhav HaShahar | 1,071 |
| Bat Ayin | 594 |
10 elections in Shibbolim
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 282 | 216 | 76.6% | +6.0 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 260 | 190 | 73.1% | +5.6 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 263 | 204 | 77.6% | +6.1 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 259 | 195 | 75.3% | +5.4 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 265 | 214 | 80.8% | +12.3 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 255 | 213 | 83.5% | +11.2 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 262 | 198 | 75.6% | +7.8 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 240 | 174 | 72.5% | +10.0 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 165 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 229 | 180 | 78.6% | +13.0 | 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.