This time, it's a personal vote: Netanyahu, yes or no?
Op-ed: It's rare for a prime minister to evoke such strong feelings of resentment among so many publics, but Netanyahu probably earned it. He is perceived as a person living in a bubble, whose real life isn't the Israeli public's real life.
On the eve of the 2015 elections, the leaders of the two large parties, Benjamin Netanyahu and Isaac Herzog, acted like that captain. Netanyahu sold everything he could find on the shelves: The Treasury to Moshe Kahlon, the Defense portfolio to Naftali Bennett, the Bar-Ilan speech to right-wing voters. Herzog followed in his footsteps on Monday evening with the last-minute announcement that the rotating premiership agreement with Tzipi Livni had been cancelled.
The conduct of these two leaders has a lot in common. First of all, the urgency. Panic may be a more appropriate word. And secondly, the spin. Anyone who is involved in politics knows that Netanyahu's promises mean nothing: They were written on ice on a very hot day. Anyone involved in politics, including Tzipi Livni herself, knew that the power-sharing agreement between Herzog and Livni had no chance of materializing. At best, it was wishful thinking, a fantasy.
In the past few days, Herzog and Livni have been under a huge amount of pressure. The argument was that cancelling the rotating premiership would give the Labor Party another two or three Knesset seats and create the gap that its members are hoping for. Opposite arguments were also raised.
On Monday, the Zionist Union was under the impression that the gap had been closed. The Zionist Union's campaign manager, Reuven Adler, presented the figures to Herzog and Livni. He avoided expressing an opinion, but the gun was on the table.
Herzog picked up the phone and called Livni. She repeated the sentence she had said during an interview in a cultural event in Kfar Saba: She would not place the rotation agreement as an obstacle during the coalition negotiations.
The spokespeople informed the media, Channel 2 understood whatever it understood, and thing got out of control (or were intentionally taken out of control). The moment the report was aired, Herzog had to stand behind it, whether he liked it or not. Livni had to too, although it took her an hour.
Livni's consent is forward-looking. If the Labor Party reaches a surprising achievement in the polls, she will have the honor of contributing to the achievement. If the result is disappointing, no one will be able to pin the blame on her.
The same applies to the Likud: The ministers' obedience can only be explained by the fear that they will be accused of the defeat. We will know what they think about the campaign only after the votes are counted.
One of the ironclad rules of political campaigns is that sharp turns must be avoided. A last-minute squall is interpreted as panic. It's risky. Netanyahu and Herzog did things differently this time. Now each of them is accusing his rival of panicking, and they may both be right.
In any event, Monday evening's drama is a smoke grenade, not an atom bomb. A few undecided voters who view the change as an act of weakness may spill out. Others, who were inclined to vote for Yair Lapid due to their hostility towards Livni, may spill in. In practice, when the voters stand behind the screen, they will find a Zionist Union ballot with Livni's name on it. The cancelled rotation will likely not affect their vote.
***
These elections are reaching the moment of truth in a state of uncertainty. The voter doesn’t know what his or her vote will be used for: Will it be part of the construction material for a national unity government? Will it contribute to the creation of a narrow government? Will it be invested in the opposition? Or will it be wasted on a party which won't pass the election threshold? Each vote this time contains a gambling element. Two phenomena have led to this uncertainty: The decision to raise the electoral threshold and the focus on Netanyahu in the election campaign.
Raising the election threshold shattered conventions in the political map. Yisrael Beytenu, which was hit hard by the police investigations and deserted by the second generation of Russian immigrants, is currently slightly above the threshold. In such a party, Election Day is very important. Someone has to drive the elderly immigrants to the polling station, someone has to make sure they vote.
In the past, the party was successfully run by Deputy Minister Fania Kirshenbaum and party CEO David Godofsky. They have both been neutralized because of the investigation. Ironically, a high voter turnout among the Arabs, which will increase the number of votes required for a Knesset seat, may serve as the final blow for Lieberman's party.
Meretz isn't far from the red line either. That's what usually happens to this party when the Labor Party, its big sister, comes to the elections from the opposition. The alarm campaign waged by Meretz in the past few weeks (which was referred to as the "gevald campaign") was similar in its nature to Netanyahu's final days' campaign. It probably brought back some voters who had moved over to the Zionist Union. The question is (1) will it be enough and (2) will Meretz be able to exist in the future with such an electoral threshold.
The third party close to the election threshold is Eli Yishai's Yachad, a coalition of Shasniks, Kahanists and the Bayit Yehudi's nationalist haredim. Assuming it will pass the threshold, the question is whether it won't fall apart the day after the elections.
A similar question can be asked about the joint list of the Arab parties. The majority of their public wants them together, and wants them within the circle of influence. The personal and ideological hard feelings are pulling to different directions.
As I already said, these elections were marked by one person: Netanyahu. The Likud launched a campaign focusing entirely on Netanyahu. The Zionist Union also launched a campaign focusing entirely on Netanyahu. With Herzog and Livni alone they wouldn't have gotten very far. Lapid attacked him on a daily basis. Bennett built his campaign on his voters' lack of trust in Netanyahu, then embraced Netanyahu, and then on Monday attacked him again. NGOs were created to call for Netanyahu's replacement. Donations poured in, from Israel and unfortunately also from abroad.
The unusual connection between Tzipi Livni and the Labor Party was created only because of the load of sentiments towards Netanyahu. Giving up the rotating premiership was possible because defeating Netanyahu was more important than anyone's ego. It's rare for a prime minister to evoke such strong feelings of resentment.
One could say that Netanyahu earned this resentment. There were likely a whole lot of reasons here, which are not situated on the right-left axis. Netanyahu is perceived as a person living in a bubble. His real life isn't our real life. Every Israeli engaged in his or her own self-examination: Netanyahu says that tens of thousands of apartments are being built – where is my apartment; Netanyahu says we defeated Hamas in Operation Protective Edge – I see Hamas from my window in Kibbutz Nahal Oz; Netanyahu says he is the victim of a worldwide plot – where is that plot.
I am also listening to what Netanyahu is saying about my profession, about my workplace. I can only conclude that something bad has happened to his connection to reality. Like some of his predecessors, he reached the point in which personal scores, hatred and fear become the main thing. That's not good news ahead of another term, if that's what the election results dictate.
This time, it seems, it's a personal vote: Netanyahu, yes or no?
