Kefar Malal
Also recorded by the Central Elections Committee as כפר מלל
How Kefar Malal voted in 2020
223 valid votes.
| List | Share | Against national |
|---|---|---|
| פה כחול לבן בראשות בני גנץ | 60.09% 134 votes |
+33.5 |
| אמת העבודה - גשר - מרצ | 16.59% 37 votes |
+10.8 |
| מחל הליכוד בהנהגת בנימין נתניהו לראשות הממשלה | 14.80% 33 votes |
−14.7 |
| ל ישראל ביתנו בראשות אביגדור ליברמן | 3.59% 8 votes |
−2.2 |
| טב ימינה הימין החדש – הבית היהודי – האיחוד הלאומי | 3.14% 7 votes |
−2.1 |
| ודעם הרשימה המשותפת חד"ש, רע"מ, תע"ל, בל"ד | 0.45% 1 votes |
−12.2 |
"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 3 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.
| ז | עוצמה ליברלית – כלכלית בראשות גלעד אלפר | 0.45% | 1 | +0.4 |
| נ | קול הנשים | 0.45% | 1 | +0.4 |
| נץ | עוצמה יהודית בראשות איתמר בן גביר | 0.45% | 1 | +0.0 |
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.
223 voters out of 281 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.
Kefar Malal against another locality, on the same axes and against the same national result.
For example: Gat(Qibbuz) · Lohame HaGeta'ot · En Gev
The nearest localities on the map, among those of a similar size (within 5 times the number of valid votes).
| Gat(Qibbuz) | 407 |
| Lohame HaGeta'ot | 415 |
| En Gev | 322 |
| Gevat | 551 |
| Merom Golan | 405 |
| Zova | 390 |
| Yehi'am | 388 |
| En Karmel | 405 |
10 elections in Kefar Malal
| Knesset | Eligible | Voters | Turnout | Against national | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25th 2022 | 273 | 210 | 76.9% | +6.3 | The results → |
| 24th 2021 | 280 | 223 | 79.6% | +12.2 | The results → |
| 23rd 2020 | 281 | 223 | 79.4% | +7.8 | The results → |
| 22nd 2019 | 285 | 232 | 81.4% | +11.5 | The results → |
| 21st 2019 | 291 | 237 | 81.4% | +13.0 | The results → |
| 20th 2015 | 288 | 239 | 83.0% | +10.6 | The results → |
| 19th 2013 | 279 | 225 | 80.6% | +12.9 | The results → |
| 18th 2009 | 283 | 222 | 78.4% | +15.9 | The results → |
| 17th 2006 | Not in source | 217 | Not in source | Not in source | The results → |
| 16th 2003 | 274 | 211 | 77.0% | +11.4 | 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.