Panels conducted a poll that was taken out for Maariv/103 FM and released on March 12 2015.
Current Knesset seats in [brackets]
24 [20] Zionist Union (Labor-Livni)
21 [18] Likud
13 [20] Yesh Atid
13 [11] The Joint (Arab) List
12 [11] Bayit Yehudi
09 [02] Kulanu (Kahlon+Kadima)
07 [10] Shas
07 [07] Yahadut Hatorah/UTJ
05 [13] Yisrael Beitenu
05 [06] Meretz
04 [02] Yachad (Yishai+Chetboun+Marzel)
65 [63] Right-Religious-Kahlon (Parties that have not ruled out nominating Netanyahu in Phase 2)
55 [57] Center-Left-Arab (Parties that have ruled out nominating Netanyahu in Phase 2)
Jeremy's Knesset Insider 
In line with every other poll except that ridiculous i24 poll. Looking more and more that Kulanu will decide at least who gets first crack at forming government.
yes, I think the koolaids are really Left dressing as Center
Kahlon is a political opportunist like Tzipi. I don’t believe he has any principles and agree that he will go left and sell out the country for his own gain. Any person on the right who is even considering voting for this guy needs to understand that with a hostile US president, now is not the time to experiment.
Won’t be a hostile US President under Herzog though. Bam!
Makes no difference who is PM. There will be a hostile U.S. President in fact. The question is how much he will make nice, but making nice is not being nice.
Yes, Obama is hostile to Israel, not Bibi.
Dear Jeremy, is it fair to conclude that the last couple of weeks poll numbers are less voters moving right to left (away from likud) but rather undecideds who always leaned left making up their minds & breaking left.
I ask because if it is latter then the israeli polls need to better report undecideds in the early polls.
Thanks!
Josh
It also looks like some votes on the right are moving to the middle with Lapid.
lapid is not and never was middle
How is Lapid not middle?
yes, center-right voters seem to have moved from Likud to YA – I cannot figure out a logical reason. I just hope that BY would end this election campaign with a successful outreach – and get those anti-Likud center-right votes, worth 3-6 seats.
Maybe the logical reason is because Likud has moved away from the centre-right, and it’s YA and voters that are more stable?
I find kind of odd that so many polls reporting are the same. Makes me wonder how accurate the polls are.
That’s the stupidest thing I’ve read today. If the polls are reporting the same thing it’s because that’s probably what’s going on on the ground. It’s not the outlier you pay attention, it’s what all the other ones show.
Sure, polls tend to become more consistent closer to the election, and starting from the assumption that they are honing in on actual public opinion at least in those moments makes sense. But James isn’t stupid to question if that is really true, because: (1) we are not seeing all the polls; and (2) many pollsters could have unwittingly built the same biases into their models. The latter seems to have been true in the 2014 U.S. mid-term elections. If you are a pollster and you see “all the polls” going one direction and yours doesn’t, you may not release it. I did hear of one; do not know, obviously. But that means the polls that get released start to look more consistent than all polls. Then if both are happening . . . . I understand Israelis vote more than Americans, so some biases would be rare, but there are a LOT of moving parts in this election! Suppose there is a Bradley Effect for the Joint List (where you tell a pollster one thing and do another); when there isn’t an “acceptable excuse” not to do identity-based voting is when it might crop up, and it might affect every pollster the same way. Anyway, there are good reasons to ask, “before I leap to conclusions, could there be another reason to explain this?”
Question: in theory, could the Hadash members of the Joint Arab List take their 7-8 seats, ditch the JL, and join Herzog’s coalition? Or are they locked into the Joint List?
If the arab list is a technical bloc – then yes!
If they could. The four parties of the Joint List go together in the elections, but in phase 2 and 3 may choose different opinions.
An example. Hadash and Taal (more pragmatics?, Hadash 5 and Taal 2 MK´s if the Joint List get 13 MK) could nominate Herzog in phase 2 and support his government from outside in phase 3, and Raam and Balad (more radicals?) will not. It is a possibility.
Bibi can survive phase one, win in phase two, cobble a coalition in phase three. But can he govern? If Bennetts price is defense, liberman insists on Justice and Kahlon Finance, Shas perhaps Housing, what useful spoils are left for Likud? How do you balance the demands of Haredim, the periphery, settlers and the Ashkenazi middle class (not exactly present)?Who in the coalition can talk to the Obama administration or even get more than a courtesy audience with any Democrat? Bibi is afraid he might lose but should be equally scared of a narrow win.
Not to mention if he slips just 1 more seat he’s stuck with Yachad holding the balance of power. I can’t imagine it would be easier to govern with Marzel holding a gun to your head.
Do you think Labor and Lukid would form a unity government together?
I think it’s unlikely, but I’m just some random Canadian dude.
James Greenlaw,
to answer your question, YES – it is always possible. First of all you never know in advance what Netanyahu will do after the elections. Second Likud has moved much towards the center in this cicle – a fact that I had hoped that people would have realized by now (but still there is a little time left).
Thing is, Bennett and Lieberman are far more afraid of a left-wing government getting into office in Israel, so they are much more likely to back down from their high price demands, because they know that if they hold out too far, that would be the only way Bibi would fail to put together a coalition and thus, possibly bring a left-wing government to power.
Likud + BY + YB only takes you to 38 seats. And I agree with you that those seats can be won by Bibi without many concessions.
Bibi still needs another 23 seats though. He needs to satisfy Kahlon and all the religious parties to get to 61 seats. He needs Yachad too in order to get any sort of margin of safety.
Yachad is probably easy to satisfy, but I think the bigger issue is the other parties will demand more if they have to sit beside Marzel in a coalition.
Bayit Yehudi can only demand Defense if they imporve on 12. Otherwise, same status. Liberman with 5 will be lucky to get anything, won’t demand Justice.
Well, I also think that Lieberman will not be able to get any significant portfolios. However, regarding BY, I would suggest that if BY and Yachad (and Shas and UTJ) would all form 1 negotiating bloc, then everything is still possible…
This question has probably been asked before, so apologies…. but, does Rivlin have to ask the party with the most seats to try form a government first?
No.
Officially, its whomever the President thinks is most likely to be able to form a government. Rivlin has stated that if 61 MKs recommend one person, he will appoint that person. Otherwise he will ask all parties to join in a temporary coalition for the purpose of changing the electoral system.
Rivlin can not be serious. Does he really believe that he can set up a temporary coalition to change the electoral system. Besides Likud and the ZU who else will agree. Somehow I can’t see Lieberman agreeing to change the threshold. (He will probably now want to lower it)
What does he want to change the electoral system to? I think there are plenty of issues that should be dealt with in Israel’s voting system, but I don’t think the coalition building process is really one of them. The fact that any government in Israel can only govern with the support of a majority of voters is a very good thing.
Changing the electoral system to a separate election of the PM, first Bibi then Barak, is what created the mess of multiple small parties and hence was dropped. Each model has its pluses and minuses, and, as in the case of the threshold increase, unanticipated consequences. No new formula can put more than a bandaid on the real issue – the ideological and sectarian fault lines that divide the society.
Avi – I would argue that moving to Single Transferable Vote with a reasonable district size might actually help heal those fault lines. Single Transferable Vote is both preferential and proportional, so it still produces a pretty diverse Knesset, but gives an incentive to parties to try and cross the various fault lines.
I think the party primary process is pretty clearly broken too, and Israel could benefit from moving to an open-list system. Especially if that was coupled with a reduction of district magnitude from 120 to around 8.
Well this answers my question. There will likely be 61+ that recommend Herzog. I don’t see Kulanu recommending Netanyahu.
In response to all the comments , I do not know what would be proposed to change, I don’t think raising the threshold is on the table, or going back to directly election PMs.
I saw something about requiring biggest party for form government, which makes little sense to me, unless they are going to add a bonus seats to the #1 winner.
Personally, I think the only way to have stability is to introduce district base representation.
CupofCanada: I like the single transferable vote model but would be fearful of the gerrymandering that would take place in a district model – many minority voting blocs (not just Arabs) are spread all over the country. Ben Gurions earliest priority was changing the electoral system and even at the height of his power got nowhere with that. Electoral reform is to Israel what intelligent gun control is to America – good idea but will never happen. And BTW if Arabs were better accepted and more integrated into Israeli politics this election would be a forgone conclusion.
Agreed on all points their Avi.
Gerrymandering’s definitely a concern, but there are countries out there with relatively fair and independent redistricting processes. And the one attempt to do in in Ireland backfired spectacularly lol (look up the Tullymander if you’re interested).
I take your point re: minority view points. I suggested a district size of ~8 with that in mind – you would need ~8.3% of the vote in a given district to have a good shot at your own seat, and I’d think each bloc would have enough concentrated pockets of support to manage that. Do you think that’d be the case? Or would groups be too evenly spread across the country to reach this?
~4-8 MK districts with open lists would generally be what academic research seems to recommend, but obviously each country is unique. Sweden and Finland operate just fine in the 10-20 MP per district range, and the Netherlands elects all 150 MPs from a single open list. The Netherlands’ ballots look kind of scary though lol.
Relevant paper if you’re interested: http://www.lse.ac.uk/government/research/resgroups/PSPE/pdf/PSPE_WP1_09.pdf
Cup of Canada: Your approach can work with the right safeguards and it beats the FPTP model. My preference for a national PR system in Israel is related to the small size of the country and my experience in multiple political systems that local politics does not bring out the best candidates but national lists attract a better stock of hopefuls and the issues run on tend to be national issues not local issues. GB of course is a hybrid of sorts since there is the tradition of candidates running in ridings not related to their personal history.
Avi 2:
“Each model has its pluses and minuses, and, as in the case of the threshold increase, unanticipated consequences.
It’s true. Some said that raise the electoral threshold damaged the Arab parties (although the logic said the contrary) but ultimately has benefited them. Conversely it could hurt someone who supported it (Liberman), and the right block (if Yahad and/or IB fall under the threshold).
There’s a history of electoral reforms meant to benefit one party backfiring in Canada too actually lol.
Avi – one suggestion is that to do what Denmark/Sweden do – they elect most of their MPs locally, but than have a national layer of top-up seats to correct from any distortions at the individual riding level.
I hear you re: national issues vs local issues. The reasons given for that sort of a riding size is that under an open list, if the list is very large it tends to be just about a couple of candidates with big profiles/money. And with a closed list it tends to be about whoever is first on the list. But yah, definitely something to consider.
How the mighty have fallen.
In 2009 Likud and YB got 42 seats in 2013 just 31 and in 2015? 26 – 28.
Maybe there is a god.
I definitely do not think this election indicates that the system is broken. Instead it shows how all voter profiles get a chance to elect MKs who truly represent their beliefs and can try to negotiate on their behalf. If certain groups find the demands of others particularly objectionable they can prioritize those issues as all of the smaller parties do. The fix that might be needed would be to promote the staying powers of governments,
Here is my idea: Once a coalition is formed, its members are proportionally allocated 20 additional mandates. This way, no one party could hold a government hostage shortly after an election. Any party leaving the coalition would lose its bonus mandates. This would lead to more robust governments and fewer snap elections, though governments could still fall apart early if several parties left which is a feature rather than a bug IMO.
There is definitely *something* amiss when a right-leaning country might end up with a left-wing government mostly due to opportunistic centrist “kingmakers.”
… right… because a Labour government is totally out of line from Israel’s history…
Ben Gurion was nothing like these Leftits. And Ben Gurion preferred the National Religious Party as his partner.
Sorry – Leftists
Has Kulanu stated that they are definitely supporting Herzog/Livni?
I don’t think they have stated anything. I think they realize they will be the kingmaker. Whoever they support will likely be the next PM.
What Kahlon HAS stated is that he is running to be Israel’s next Finance Minister. And Netanyahu is the only one in a position to offer it to him. Herzog has already promised the Finance portfolio to someone in his own circle. He also said that his disagreements with Netanyahu are in the areas of economic and to some degree, social issues. Netanyahu’s main issue is security, so he will placate Kahlon however he needs to on social and economic matters to get him into a strong on defense coalition–an area in which Bibi and Kahlon are basically in agreement.
He’s also stated that he does not agree with Netanyhu’s diplomatic approach. And that finance minister is not a make or break matter. So, we shall see.
I’d expect Herzog to offer finance to Kahlon at the end of the day.
I’m sorry, this has been bugging me for a while. HaBayit Yehudi, Yisrael Beiteinu. Judean People’s Front, People’s Front of Judea.
Amirite? Life of Brian? Anyone?
Bahahhahaha.
Jeremy should start adding fake party names to the poll results to see if anyone is paying attention, Kvetchers united or is that a football team?
someone asked about my previous career as a standup comedian in an interview today 🙂
Actually, I think Zionist Union is the funniest.
The problem with that part fo the Life of Brian is that it is much too close to what actually happened.