The full Likud list isn’t expected to be released until Thursday afternoon, but a partial count from the Likud primaries held on Wednesday, indicates that the Likud list will probably looks as follows:

To begin with, PM Benjamin Netanyahu handily beat Danny Danon as party head, which means he stays on in the number 1 position.

The votes for the top positions are as follows:

UPDATE 4:00 PM
With 80% of the vote in, the Likud list is as follows:

1 Benjamin Netanyahu
2 Gilad Erdan
3 Yuli Edelstein
4 Yisrael Katz
5 Miri Regev
6 Silvan Shalom
7 Moshe Yaalon
8 Zeev Elkin
9 Tzachi HaNegbi
10 Danny Danon
11 Yariv levin
12 Reserved *
13 Gila Gamliel
14 Yuval Steinitz
15 Ofer Akunis
16 David Biton
17 Chaim Katz
18 Jackie Levi *
19 Reserved *
20 Dichter
21 David Amsalem *
22 Miki Zohar *
23 Reserved *
24 Ayub Kara *
25 Reserved *
26 Tzipi Hotoveli

* Positions are reserved.

Moshe Feiglin is very far down the list in an unrealistic spot.

An estimated 55% of the Likud’s 96,000 members placed their votes in 600 ballot boxes across 115 voting stations around the country.

Mew York mayoral candidates are boning up on Jewish law and are learning about Jewish holidays as they attend Jewish events in the race for the large Jewish vote, especially in the Democratic primary.

There are no Jewish candidates to replace Michael Bloomberg, and the lack of a strong Republican candidate more or less puts a Democrat in Gracie Mansion next November.

Approximately 600,000 Democrats are expected to vote in the primaries, a large number of them black or Jewish. Outside of Manhattan, Jews account for more than 15 percent of the vote, according to The New York Times, and nearly one-third of them are Orthodox, whose population continues to soar.

“The seven or eight percentage points that the Orthodox Jewish vote makes up in a primary could definitely make the difference,” Councilman David Greenfield told Colin Campbell in 2012.

It is no wonder that City Council Speaker Christine Quinn attended a Tu B’Shvat “seder” earlier this year and met with Orthodox women who own or manage businesses in Williamsburg.

Polls give her a commanding lead over rivals with 37 percent of the projected vote and 40 percent of the Jewish vote, but future polls could change drastically, one way or the other, if Mayor Bloomberg endorses a candidate. He previously has said that Quinn is the only “rational” candidate but has since gone cold one her after she call for a new Police Department watchdog.

With the primaries five months away, she has plenty of time to go after the Jewish vote, but for the time being, she has not been overly noticeable at Jewish events. One point against her among Orthodox Jews may be that although she is married, she also is openly homosexual.

Her closest rivals are Bill Thompson and Bill de Blasio, who are running close to each other in the polls.

Thompson is a black who is highly regarded in many Orthodox Jewish circles and may be able to garner the Jewish vote to close the gap behind Quinn.

The Times reported last month that Thompson knows better than to shake hands with an Orthodox women and may even have learned a bit of Yiddish that his father, a former legislator, often used.

He is an Episcopalian, but his father’s second wife was Jewish.

“I still remember his bar mitzvah,” joked Ben Barber, an observant Jew who owns a linen business in Borough Park told the newspaper.

Last month, Thompson was the only Democratic candidate at a press conference who denounced Brooklyn College for hosting a Boycott Israel movement event.

Thompson also was the first comptroller to make city investments in Israeli bonds.

De Blasio has 18 percent of the Jewish vote, according to New York Mayor BlogSpot, which also reported Sunday that he attended the Belz annual dinner in February, where he was introduced as “the next mayor of New York City.”

The New York Times reported last month that de Blasio has been “attuned” to issues of business fines and parking that have irritated Orthodox Jews.

Quinn last week attacked a $1 million ad blitz against Quinn, who implied that it was financed “by those closely aligned with my opponents,” but de Blasio denied any connection with the campaign, whose spokeswoman Chelsea Conner said, “Frankly, the Quinn folks made an inaccurate statement Sunday night, they knew it as well as us, and they had to walk it back Monday morning.”

All of the other Democratic party candidates have marginal support except for John Liu who garnered 9 percent in the Marist poll.

Some Jewish leaders have noted “he hasn’t missed any Jewish event in the years he’s been in office,”  BlogSpot wrote.

One piece of political news that probably went unnoticed to most, especially among all the coalition-negotiation rumors, was that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is considering cancelling the Likud’s primaries.

An article about this was first published on Jan. 28th,  just after the Knesset election on Israel’s Walla news site. Then, over the last few days it sprung up again in Ma’ariv/NRG and Yediot. Another Feb. 10 article in Ma’ariv claims that the Prime Minister intends to have the primaries cancelled before ministers are sworn into the government – that is, potentially in a matter of weeks.

To most people this is just internal party politics, but it’s really not. It directly affects the democratic nature of the State of Israel. In Israel, voters do not choose individual candidates, they choose slates. In effect, there are 120 legislators, but not a single representative. The candidates themselves are chosen via internal party processes – sometimes by a committee – a larger “central committee” or a smaller secretariat or selection committee – sometimes by the chairman, sometimes by the membership in an open primary. Those primaries are the only opportunity a citizen has to vote for an actual legislator, the only time a legislator directly faces a citizen and is held accountable for his record.

Unfortunately, only a few parties hold primaries. Likud and Labor do. This past election cycle, the Jewish Home held primaries, but only half of its list was chosen in the primaries, the rest by the central committee of T’kuma/the National Union. Kadima held primaries for its chairman, but cancelled its primaries for its list because it was expected to only get a maximum of 3 seats (in the end it got two). In total, about 42-3 Members of Knesset were chosen in primaries, meaning about  1/3rd of Knesset Members were chosen by actual people and not by party bosses. Even more unfortunate, is the fact that only a small percentage, something like three percent, of the public is eligible to vote in a party primary, and even less actually do vote.

But still it’s a start. If Israel won’t change over to a district-based electoral system (one representative per district), the only hope for the Members of Knesset being chosen by the people is through the primaries.

The alleged reason for cancelling primaries is, reportedly, that there are those who believe that the Likud’s list was too right-wing and that cost it votes and at the same time, not all party members voted for the party. Or in other words, the “settlers” registered to the party to push candidates like Tzipi Hotovely, Danny Danon, Ze’ev Elkin, Yariv Levin and Moshe Feiglin. The problem with that allegation is that there are many factions within the party who behave this way (like unions and members registered by vote contractors); there probably was a higher voting rate among settlers who were registered for the Likud then those who weren’t;  and of the 11 seats the Likud-Beytenu list lost from its prior standing the Knesset, seven mandates worth of votes went to the right. Any internal party player, especially the Prime Minister knows all this.

It is true though that the primaries are intensely manipulated – by the various factions/MKs/branch chairmen/vote contractors (vote contracting, as I have explained elsewhere refers to the practice of registering people to the party and then kind of bargaining with their votes for personal gain). This is a huge problem. But this manipulation can only take place because so few people are registered to the party. Many of them are registered by internal players, who can trade on their votes.

If, on the other hand, a million or 500,000 people  instead of 120,000 were registered to the Likud, and those people were registered by the party itself and not for any specific internal party player, it would be too hard for any vote contractor or even group, such as a union, to register and control the numbers necessary to manipulate the system. Vote contracting in its current powerful form, would be a thing of the past.

That would require an immense registration effort by the party over several years. That is very possible. In Israel, however, long term solutions, are not the preferred solutions. It’s easier and more seductive to maneuver one’s way to power, which in this case may mean canceling the primaries and concentrate power in the hands of an even smaller group of people.

PM Netanyahu said on Tuesday night, that he plans on canceling the primary system in the Likud, according to Channel 1.

Instead of Likud party members voting for which candidates they want to run for Knesset, it appears that Netanyahu wants to personally select and place each candidate.

Netanyahu’s message is that the party  list is what caused the Likud’s poor showing in the election, as opposed to his attacking his natural allies on the religious and the right, while not going after Yair Lapid at all, as well as the poorly organized and unfocused campaign that Netanyahu ran.

Beit Yehudi chairman Naftali Bennett on Thursday night proved that he has what it takes to win big in national elections. In a statement regarding the evacuation of settlements in a future peace deal with the Palestinians, Bennet gave an answer that evoked a huge storm of protests and rebukes from—predictably—the left and—most revealingly—from Likud as well.

Bennett told a Channel 2 interviewer: “Should I receive an order to evacuate a Jew from his home and chase him away, my conscience will not permit it. I would ask my commanding officer to absolve me.”

When asked directly if this meant he would refuse an order from his military commander, Bennett said: “I’m sorry, I am incapable of entering a Jewish home and evacuating it.” Bennett also remarked that he “also wouldn’t want to evict an Arab from his home.”

Bennett then called on Israelis to vote for his party in order to influence the future government. He also denied claims that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would try to remove him from the coalition, because of their past disagreements. Bennett at one point served as Netanyahu’s chief of staff.

As was to be expected, the Labor party attacked Bennett’s statement. “This is an unfortunate and unacceptable statement even during the elections,” MK Eitan Cabel, head of the response team at Labor, told reporters. “Regardless of politics, on the left and on the right, refusing an order is crossing a red line that affects our ability to function as a society, and a statement by a public leader encouraging it is serious and totally illegitimate.”

The Kadima party, whose leaders Sharon, Olmert and Mofaz led the evacuation of some 10 thousand Gush Katif Jews in 2005, also condemned Bennett’s statement.

Just the condemnations from the left could suffice for an extra seat or so for the Beit Yehudi party, as its voters, many of whom live on the wrong side of the green line, which also cuts through Jerusalem, have been yearning for a legitimate leader who would say precisely these things – that an order to remove Jews from their homes has a black flag flying over it.

(Back in 1957, future Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Levi condemned the accused in the Kaffar Kassem massacre for obeying an illegal order which a black flag should have been waving over it, like a sign that declares: “Verbotten.”)

But the real bonus to Bennett and his party came last night and this morning from the Likud party, which has been hemorrhaging votes in the polls to the Beit Yehudi list.

Head of the Likud hasbara team, Minister Gilad Arden, told Walla! News that Bennett’s statement “Caused serious damage to the army, because the army is based on obeying orders.” Arden added: “As someone who is opposed to uprooting settlements, I think this position is also very harmful to right wing camp, because if you can justify conscientious objection in this case, what would stop Zehava Gal-On and leftist groups like The Courage to Refuse from encouraging soldiers not to serve in Judea and Samaria?”

Well, for one thing they’re already doing it – they hardly need an approval from Naftali Bennet. But, most importantly, Arden has stated for the record that—despite his stated opposition to dismantling settlements—he would support it once the order came down via the IDF chain of command.

If you’re a Likud voter living in Karnei Shomron – this should be reason enough for you to switch to Bennett.

Strategic Affairs Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Moshe (Bogie) Ya’alon, also attacked Bennett, adding his gravitas as former IDF chief of staff to the condemnation.

Except that Ya’alon himself did not receive an extension of his term as chief of staff right before the Gush Katif deportation, because his bosses in the Defense Ministry didn’t trust him to prosecute the evacuation with the necessary zeal.

Exposing Likud as being, essentially, just like Labor and Kadima regarding the dismantling of Jewish towns and villages, Naftali Bennett may have bitten another two or three seats off his rivals’ take. If he manages to weather this storm without apologizing – now would be a good time to take a page from the Liberman play book – Bennett could be the first National Religious leader to actually receive the bulk of the votes cast by National Religious Israelis.

This is part IV in a series about the Likud’s Knesset list and its primaries, which were held November 25-26th. The previous articles (here, here, and here) dealt with the claims by the media that the Likud had, as a result of the recent primaries shifted to the extreme right. I explained how these claims were out of touch with reality: The Likud list remained very similar to that of 2008. Ideologically right-leaning candidates did very well, but so did non-ideological or media-acceptable candidates.

All in all, only five sitting Members of Knesset did not achieve “secure” spots on the list. The common denominator between all three was not a lack of extremism or Leftist policy (only two were supporters of Palestinian statehood), but a general lack of campaigning and public activism.

One claim made by some commentators, however,  had some validity. It was that there was a “deal system” in place.

This is not unique to the Likud. It pervades the entire Israeli political system. Consider, for example, the fact that the government in Israel is formed through negotiations and haggling over ministries, budgets and policies. Contrast that with the U.S. system in which after the president is elected, he chooses his cabinet with the consent of the Senate and then presents a budget to congress for approval. There is much less haggling that goes on because the President has already one the election and his appointments can’t jeopardize that. Of course, negotiation, compromise and deals are inseparable from the political process, but in a party-list system, deal-making is the primary feature. (Note: a “party-list” system should not be confused with a parliamentary system, which can be a district/constituency system, a party-list system or a combination of the two).

The deal-making that some pundits referred to was the fact that certain candidates and power-factions in the Likud made cross-endorsement deals to ensure mutual success. Thus, for example, Moshe Feiglin and two high ranking, but non-ideological Likud members, Silvan Shalom and Yisrael Katz were reported to have made such an agreement. Gilad Erdan and Gideon Sa’ar were said to be working together. Other nationalist candidates like Yariv Levin and Kety Shitreet were also said to receive support from Feiglin.

Technically, candidates in a party primary are competitors, each one striving for more votes than the others in order to get a higher ranking on the party’s list of candidates for the parliament. Throughout most of their term, Members of Knesset in the same party are in fact locked in this sort of popularity contest. But come the primaries themselves, in practice, the candidates don’t remain in complete competition. At that point, candidates join together, either completely or to a limited degree, often in odd ways to ensure mutual success.

Because voters can choose a number of candidates – in the Likud primaries, voters could choose 12 national candidates and one district candidate – candidates can make cross-endorsement deals which will ensure those who are part of the deal receive a great deal more votes then they could have if they ran on their own.

Three voting lists distributed during the Likud primaries in Jerusalem. Close inspection reveals that the list of recommended candidates is different on each, meaning that the particular vote-contractor who distributed these gave large numbers of votes to more than 12 candidates, making him popular among a great many of the Likud’s list. These were just three I picked up off the floor at the end of the voting. Who knows how many different lists were distributed and what deals were made with whom for each set of votes given to each candidate.  

Let’s say, for instance, that Candidate A has 2000 supporters within the party, while Candidate B also has 2000, and Candidate C has 3000. Candidates A and B can join forces, asking their supporters to vote for both of them, providing each of them with 4000 votes, beating out Candidate C even though he is more popular than each of them separately. With a total of 12+1 votes, the possibilities for deals between the candidates abound. Add to the mix interest groups who control large swaths of votes, who can not only support certain candidates but can trade support with other interest groups or candidates in exchange for votes for their favored candidate, the system becomes vastly more complicated.

The Likud’s highest ranking female candidate, MK Tzipi Hotovely called for the adoption of the Levy report and more construction in all parts of Israel at victory party last night in Or Yehuda, Israel, attended by hundreds of her supporters.

“Construction, construction, construction, in all parts of the country,” Hotovely declared.

In the recent Likud primaries Hotovely won the 10th spot on the Likud’s list, making her the highest ranking female candidate from the Likud party. On the joint Likud-Beytenu list, Hotovely has the 15th spot.

Hotovely said that her victory shows that clean and principled politics can win out and called on voters to support the Likud so that the Likud can follow through with its pro-Land of Israel agenda.

Likud MK Tzipi Hotovely, 34, is an attorney and a doctorate student at the Faculty of Law in Tel Aviv University. She is Orthodox and describes herself as “religious right winger.” When she was first elected, at the tender age of 30, she was the youngest MK in history. But she is also a staunch defender of women’s rights and chairs the Knesset Committee on the Status of Women.

Hotovely’s parents immigrated from then Soviet Georgia.

She began to gain notoriety in Israel in 2006, when she became a regular panelist on a Channel 10 political show hosted by Dan Margalit and began to write a column for NRG. After joining Likud in 2008, she made it to the 18th spot on the party’s 2009 Knesset list and became an MK. In the November primaries she reached the 10th spot, making her one of her party’s top leaders.

Her views on settlements and legitimizing Israeli rule in Judea and Samaria are expected to play a major role in the next Netanyahu government, along with Danny Danon, who has the sixth place position.

Yori Yanover contributed to this report.