Israeli General Election (2nd of March, 2020): Madness

[Walmart_shopper]

Otzma and JH have agreed to run together, so we are getting a replay of the April election on the right (except this time Zehut isn't running).

Otzma get spots 3,6,9 which is what they demanded last time but were refused by JH.
National Union technically haven't agreed to join yet, but I don't see any other options for them.

Looks to me like Peretz kinda played Smotrich this time by ensuring good spots for his party, right?

Anyway, interesting that we're seeing a replay. It'll be so funny if the New Right doesn't pass the threshold again.

It would be funnier if they both miss the threshold.

If religious zionist voters have any values left they'll not vote for a nazi to the Knesset and that could happen, but I strongly doubt it.

Also, I saw a poll today showing the Democratic Camp below the threshold. The left really needs to get its sh**t together.

I think the point is that for many religious zionist values today are precisely about electing a Nazi to the Knesset. And for the religious Zionists who still have some residual attachment to ordinary democratic values there is the Likud, which is itself becoming less democratic and sane as it becomes more entrenched in a religious Zionist milieu.

[jaymichaud]

Otzma and JH have agreed to run together, so we are getting a replay of the April election on the right (except this time Zehut isn't running).

Otzma get spots 3,6,9 which is what they demanded last time but were refused by JH.
National Union technically haven't agreed to join yet, but I don't see any other options for them.

Does this not mean they will be above the threshold for sure? If so why should there be any belief that the deadlock will end after the March 2020 election ?

No, definitely not. Both Jewish Home and New Right will almost inevitably be on the edge of the threshold and the best case scenario for the right is each getting in and netting maybe 8 or 9 mandates. Even that, though, would probably not give the right wing anything close to 61 mandates.

It seems to me that this election comes down to either a left wing majority or more deadlock that is either resolved by Liberman choosing a side (probably the right wing) in a narrow government or Netanyahu stepping down. That is actually the exact inverse of the last election, where the left didn't even dream of a majority but just wanted to keep the right from getting 61 seats. This time around I think the right is just hoping to keep Gantz from getting a majority and, at most, getting more seats than the left block.

In the VERY best case scenario, I see the Left/Center-Left winning their 61. It’s been predicted pretty consistently that Joint List will keep their 13 seats. Labor and DU will probably maintain their 11 seats between them too. B&W would need 37 then.

[LabourJersey]

This might be a bad place to ask this, but why exactly does Israel have at-large parliamentary elections? It just seems a little odd having a Westminster-ish system but without constituencies. Is there some historical rationale for it?

[Hnv1]

This might be a bad place to ask this, but why exactly does Israel have at-large parliamentary elections? It just seems a little odd having a Westminster-ish system but without constituencies. Is there some historical rationale for it?

Short answer: there was little time to decide the system in 48.

Longer answer: Between the 1921-48 there were semi parliamentary elections under British rule but as the population wasn’t evenly spread in any sensible way the elections were at large. When the state was formed there was also no reasonable way to have boundaries plus I assume that at the time the mostly Palestinian rural areas would have produced “undesirable” foreseen outcomes.
Also note that the first election were for the constitutional convention not parliament, at-large election for constitutional delegates is preferable. the constitutional convention declared itself a parliament in 1949.
Ever since then there were numerous calls for regional elections as early as 1958 but they never succeeded. There’s the fear of terrible gerrymandering and the bizarre population spread in Israel, plus the fact that let’s be honest no one trusts the poor Jewish periphery and Arab population here with running fair elections considering what we see on the municipal level.

There other reasons, some good reasons even to prevent this move. Right now there’s a trend going on for a mixed system like the Germans, this might go down more easily than the UK/US delegates system

[Antonio the Sixth]

FPP is a terrible system, so the question isn't why some countries don't have it, but why some countries still do have it.

[LabourJersey]

FPP is a terrible system, so the question isn't why some countries don't have it, but why some countries still do have it.

Sure, but there's the obvious compromise of multi-member districts selected by PR. That keep the benefits of a PR system while still ensuring MKs can more specifically represent Haifa or Tel Aviv or where ever, as opposed to the country as a whole.

[Hnv1]

FPP is a terrible system, so the question isn't why some countries don't have it, but why some countries still do have it.

There’s no perfect system even in ideal theory, it’s very context and society dependent.

[Tintrlvr]

FPP is a terrible system, so the question isn't why some countries don't have it, but why some countries still do have it.

Sure, but there's the obvious compromise of multi-member districts selected by PR. That keep the benefits of a PF system while still ensuring MKs can more specifically represent Haifa or Tel Aviv or where ever, as opposed to the country as a whole.

Israel is a really small country, though. Internally diverse, but small. So this is not a very meaningful concern, and the internal diversity actually makes it even less of a concern because inevitably the left-liberal politician will be from Tel Aviv (e.g.) and represent Tel Aviv as there are few left-liberals elsewhere, and polarization by ideology is much more important than polarization by geography.

[jaymichaud]

This might be a bad place to ask this, but why exactly does Israel have at-large parliamentary elections? It just seems a little odd having a Westminster-ish system but without constituencies. Is there some historical rationale for it?

As someone said earlier, size. If you divided 9,000,000 people by 120 constituents then that's 1 representative per 75,000. Put this in comparison with America where some congressional districts have up to 1 million people.

[Oryxslayer]

This might be a bad place to ask this, but why exactly does Israel have at-large parliamentary elections? It just seems a little odd having a Westminster-ish system but without constituencies. Is there some historical rationale for it?

As someone said earlier, size. If you divided 9,000,000 people by 120 constituents then that's 1 representative per 75,000. Put this in comparison with America where some congressional districts have up to 1 million people.

I mean, that would be a similar ratio to the UK in most of the country, so there's nothing wrong number wise. FTPPs benefits are better utilized with smaller an more geographically consistent locales. I would say there's more a problem implementing FPTP in Israel because of how every three Jews has  five political opinions as the saying goes. If there is to be reform in the future to prevent future deadlocks, then a first place bonus like Greece or Italy previously would ease coalition negotiations, encourage there to actually be a big two rather than a big one and a disjointed opposition, and it would deminish the power that fringe groups like the Haredim hold over govt.

[jaymichaud]

This might be a bad place to ask this, but why exactly does Israel have at-large parliamentary elections? It just seems a little odd having a Westminster-ish system but without constituencies. Is there some historical rationale for it?

As someone said earlier, size. If you divided 9,000,000 people by 120 constituents then that's 1 representative per 75,000. Put this in comparison with America where some congressional districts have up to 1 million people.

I mean, that would be a similar ratio to the UK in most of the country, so there's nothing wrong number wise. FTPPs benefits are better utilized with smaller an more geographically consistent locales. I would say there's more a problem implementing FPTP in Israel because of how every three Jews has  five political opinions as the saying goes. If there is to be reform in the future to prevent future deadlocks, then a first place bonus like Greece or Italy previously would ease coalition negotiations, encourage there to actually be a big two rather than a big one and a disjointed opposition, and it would deminish the power that fringe groups like the Haredim hold over govt.

Yeah, it'd decimate smaller parties in general. Especially Labor, Meretz and The Jewish Home who rely on kibbutzim/moshavim and small settlements respectively.

[America Needs R'hllor]

The Likud list primaries were cancelled by the party's court.

[Hnv1]

The Likud list primaries were cancelled by the party's court.

Which is amusing as legally they were required and it was overruled merely because the king opposed it.
Also mass irregularities and dirty tricks by Bibi and the party mechanism before the primaries on Thursday. As usual Likud is a bin filled with rotting waste

[Filuwaúrdjan]

For a preview of what FPTP would look like in Israel, one needs only really to look at what it looks like in India. The effect in very fragmented societies is not a neat, happy two-and-a-bit party system with firm parliamentary majorities and good governance* but a permanent electoral carnival of horse-trading, shifting alliances and often quite random winners in this or that constituency and sometimes even random winners nationally...

_{*Not that this is actually the result in societies that are not particularly fragmented, I might well add.}

[Famous Mortimer]

a permanent electoral carnival of horse-trading, shifting alliances

lol Israel already has this. Coalitions can exist under both FPTP and PR.

[jaymichaud]

Some controversy over the Bayit Yehudi + Otzma mess. BYs central committee is gonna put it to a vote.

[danny]

Polls are now open until 23:00 in the Likud primary, with 116,048 potential voters.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

a permanent electoral carnival of horse-trading, shifting alliances

lol Israel already has this. Coalitions can exist under both FPTP and PR.

Yes, that's the point. The supposed benefits would not appear, and to the defects would emerge a whole new set of difficulties, one of which would be randomness.

[Walmart_shopper]

Some controversy over the Bayit Yehudi + Otzma mess. BYs central committee is gonna put it to a vote.

I'm not sure that it's realistic to expect BY to have even a fragment of the moral sense necessary to reject bringing Otzmah on board. But I would love to be surprised.

[Keep Calm and ...]

https://twitter.com/AsiaElects/status/1210305949921095680

[jaymichaud]

https://twitter.com/AsiaElects/status/1210305949921095680

Sa'ar did better than expected if this is true.

They're definitely losing the election again, tho.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/AsiaElects/status/1210305949921095680

Likud cannot be allowed to lead the State of Israel any longer.

[Hnv1]

Looks closer to 80-20, bad defeat for Saar, even Danon had 21% against Bibi. Still can’t win a GE

[bigic]

Is there a chance for Saar to break away and found his own party?

[danny]

Looks closer to 80-20, bad defeat for Saar, even Danon had 21% against Bibi. Still can’t win a GE

Actually looking closer to that poll right now: 73.8%-26.2% after 58% of polling places were counted.