Likud’s projected seat count varies by thirteen across Israel’s polling houses, 24 days from the vote
The spread between pollsters is now wider than the gap between the two leading parties — and the opposition still has not named a candidate for prime minister.
Israelis vote on 27 October, a date the coalition announced on 12 July, the last legally available one; Haaretz noted the 25th Knesset will be the first legislature since 1988 to serve a full four-year term. The newest survey in the window, a Channel 13 poll published on the evening of 30 September and reported by Haaretz on 1 October, gives Netanyahu’s bloc 54 seats against 52 for the bloc of Jewish opposition parties whose leaders have said they will not sit with Arab parties, with the Arab parties on 14. Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar slipped one to 21; Likud gained one to 19. Haaretz’s reading is that the boycott, not the arithmetic, is what hands Netanyahu the edge. The Channel 13 original should be consulted for pollster and sample size, which the published summary omits.
The aggregate tells a different story about the polls themselves. The Middle East Forum’s poll of polls, which says it compiles 308 surveys released in 2026 and averages the newest from each of 14 houses, puts Yashar on 24 and Likud on 23 — but Likud’s range across those houses runs from 18 to 31. The spread inside one party is larger than the gap between the two leaders. JPost found the same pattern in five polls published after the party lists closed: Yashar was largest in four, while an i24NEWS/Direct Polls survey put Likud first on 27. On the premiership question, Channel 14 — aligned with Netanyahu — had him beating Eisenkot 53 to 47 on 23 September; a Maariv poll two weeks earlier had Eisenkot ahead 50 to 38.
Assessment: A twelve-point swing on the same question in the same fortnight is a measurement about Israeli pollsters, not about Israeli voters, and it should be reported that way. The Middle East Forum is a US think tank with a known orientation; it aggregates others' work, so read it as a directory of publishers rather than as a finding. The premiership table circulating this week comes via Wikipedia’s compilation and needs checking row by row against the broadcasters. What is not in dispute is the structural problem both Haaretz and the Times of Israel named within 48 hours of each other: a reconciliation meeting of opposition leaders ended without a candidate. Those are analyses, not reporting. The underlying fact — date, attendees, outcome — is what the desk still needs.