Israel election results live: count of absentee ballots under way as coalition talks set to begin

Absentee ballots let eligible voters participate when they cannot vote at their registered polling station on election day. They matter because excluding these voters could distort the final result, especially in a close contest. Their counting therefore continues after ordinary polling has ended.

The article gives several examples of absentee voters. They include many people serving in the IDF, diplomats, prisoners, and people in hospital. These voters cast ballots through a separate process, so officials must collect, verify, and count them after election-day voting finishes.

The count was still under way when the article was published. Ynet reported that just over 29,000 of an estimated 500,000 absentee ballots had been counted. Early results showed Likud leading among them, but experts said the completed tally was unlikely to significantly change the projected seat distribution.

The projected numbers show why coalition bargaining matters. The article puts Gadi Eisenkot’s opposition bloc at 48 seats and parties representing Palestinian citizens of Israel at 19 seats. Together, those figures would reach 67 seats, above the 61 needed for a majority in the 120-seat Knesset.

The 19 projected seats were driven by record-high turnout among the Arab population. The larger Joint List was projected to hold 11 seats, while the article also discusses Ra’am as a possible partner. These parties are not a single political group, but they could collectively affect whether an opposition government can command support.

The article does not give a complete seat figure for Netanyahu’s bloc. It says his far-right coalition lost its mandate, while the opposition had a firm majority when Palestinian-led parties were included. The final absentee-ballot count was expected to leave the broad projection largely unchanged.

Losing a coalition majority does not automatically remove a sitting prime minister. The central issue is whether another group can assemble enough parliamentary support to form a government. Netanyahu’s political advantage comes from the opposition’s refusal, or reluctance, to work with Palestinian-led parties.

The article describes a possible arithmetic route to change. Yair Golan said the opposition had a majority when Palestinian citizens’ parties were included. The Joint List offered to help oust Netanyahu, and a survey found clear majority support among opposition voters for working with Ra’am. Yet Gadi Eisenkot set conditions that made their formal coalition participation politically impossible.

If opposition leaders cannot agree on cooperation, Netanyahu may remain prime minister despite losing the election’s mandate. He could lead a caretaker government for a prolonged period, or Israel could hold another election. The article presents this barrier as the key consequence of the result.

Palestinian citizens of Israel are represented in the article by parties including the Joint List and Ra’am. They are citizens who participate in Israel’s elections, but their parties do not describe themselves as Zionist. The article says Palestinian citizens make up about 20% of Israel’s population.

Their political leverage comes from the parliamentary numbers. Palestinian-led parties were projected to win 19 seats, while the opposition bloc was projected to win 48. Together, those groups could pass the 61-seat majority threshold. Yousef Jabareen said the Joint List would use its projected 11 seats to help remove Netanyahu’s government and change Israel’s political situation.

Their role remains uncertain because opposition leaders have feared the political cost of cooperation. Jabareen called for Jewish-Arab partnership, and a survey showed support for working with Ra’am among opposition voters. If cooperation happens, these parties could enable a new government; if not, Netanyahu may stay in office.

A Palestinian-led party could help an opposition government without taking ministerial posts or formally joining its coalition. It might support the government’s formation, abstain on selected votes, or back specific legislation. This arrangement would still give the opposition enough parliamentary support to replace Netanyahu.

The article gives the clearest example through Yousef Jabareen. He said the Joint List would seek to use its projected 11 seats to facilitate getting rid of Netanyahu’s government. That wording suggests influence from outside a formal governing partnership. The party could provide essential votes while maintaining its own political identity.

This option could avoid some of the objections raised by Jewish opposition leaders. It would also be fragile, because outside support must be negotiated issue by issue or through agreed conditions. The article does not describe a finalized arrangement. It says Palestinian parties were ready for change, while opposition leaders remained silent and weighed their political promises.

Israel’s election results lead to coalition talks because voters elect parties to the Knesset rather than directly choosing a prime minister. The decisive question after counting is which party leader can gather enough parliamentary support to govern. A party can win the most seats without holding a majority alone.

The article illustrates this problem through the opposition’s 48 projected seats and the 19 seats projected for Palestinian-led parties. That combination could exceed the 61-seat majority threshold. But many Jewish opposition parties rejected cooperation with Palestinian-led groups, so the arithmetic did not automatically produce a government.

The result therefore begins a negotiation over partners, support, and governing conditions. Netanyahu’s coalition had lost its mandate, yet he could remain in office if opponents failed to agree. The article says this could mean a prolonged caretaker government or another election. Final absentee ballots were unlikely to change that basic political challenge.

The article does not explain Israel’s electoral formula. In general, Israel uses nationwide proportional representation: parties receive Knesset seats broadly according to their share of the vote, provided they pass the legal electoral threshold. Voters therefore choose party lists, not individual constituency representatives.

The key mechanism is fragmentation. Several parties can win seats, but even the strongest party may fall well short of 61 seats. The largest party must then negotiate with other parties whose seats can create a governing majority. Those partners may demand policy commitments or positions in return for their support.

The article shows the result of that system in practice. The opposition had 48 projected seats, while Palestinian-led parties had 19. Their combined total could exceed the majority threshold, but political refusals blocked an easy partnership. Thus the election produced bargaining rather than an automatic winner, and Netanyahu could remain in office if talks failed.