Benjamin Netanyahu is confident of his party’s chances (Image: Getty)
United States President Donald Trump says he is responsible for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s election success, as the Israeli leader is claiming victory.
President Trump said that his endorsement of the Prime Minister ‘turned the tide’ from a “decisive defeat” to a “big come-from-behind stalemate, or even a WIN”.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has announced that his party will be victorious in the Israel election – despite exit polls suggesting this may not be the case. A riled up crowd chanted, sang and cheered as Mr Netanyahu spoke early Wednesday morning as the votes were being tallied, with Mr Netanyahu joining in one of the songs.
Netanyahu told his supporters that official results for the Israeli election will show that “Likud is the largest party in Israel”, telling supporters that “Israel faces a once-in-a-lifetime historic opportunity.”
Mr Netanyahu spoke to supporters of his Likud party, according to reports he told them: “We are waiting for the official results, which will show that the Likud is the largest party in Israel.” He added: “Israel faces a once-in-a-lifetime historic opportunity, together with our partner President Trump, to eliminate the existential threat from Iran once and for all.”
During his speech, the Prime Minister called for a “strong, right-wing” government in a defiant speech after Israel’s elections. Netanyahu also slammed the country’s Arab-led parties, which exit polls suggested expanded their strength in parliament, calling on Jewish parties to line up behind him.
The post reads: “When President Trump endorsed Bibi Netanyahu, the whole tide turned, and now, rather than a decisive defeat for a Great Prime Minister, it looks like a big come-from-behind stalemate, or even a WIN for Netanyahu. It all took place AFTER the Endorsement by President Trump, who only wants what is good for the Middle East, Israel, and the United States of America!”
The post ended by seeming to credit an “Irving C. Schwartz”.
sraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gestures while addressing supporters (Image: getty)
But exit polls showed that Israeli voters appeared to have delivered a sharp rebuke on Tuesday to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, indicating voters gave his opponents the edge. The exit polls initially released by major Israeli TV stations suggested that Mr Netanyahu’s bloc won 50 seats, the opposition won 52-53 and Arab parties won 17-18.
The polls published by the three major TV stations were then revised to suggest a slight increase in support for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu but still leaving him short of a governing majority. The revised polls suggest that Netanyahu’s Likud Party will be the largest in parliament, with about 27 seats.
But the broader bloc of parties led by Netanyahu and the bloc of parties led by his main rival, Gadi Eisenkot, each captured about 51 seats in parliament, the polls suggest. Initial exit polls had indicated Eisenkot’s bloc had a slight edge.
A candidate needs 61 parliamentary seats to form a majority coalition government. Arab-led parties won the remaining 18 seats, the exit polls suggested.
Whether those disparate parties can form a government is uncertain and will likely take weeks of haggling.
The opposition may still find it difficult to form a government to replace him. The easiest path would involve Mr Netanyahu’s main rival, former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, partnering with Arab-led parties, but that could prove politically difficult and potentially alienate other opposition factions.
If the exit polls prove correct, it sets the stage for weeks of political jockeying before a prime minister is declared – or another round of elections is called.
Mr Eisenkot said the exit polls show a “lack of confidence” in the current prime minister. Arab voters celebrated the exit polls while supporters of far-right parties aligned with Mr Netanyahu expressed disappointment.
Like all surveys, exit polls are subject to potential error. Preliminary results are expected in the coming hours. Final results are expected in the coming days and may vary from the exit polls.
Netanyahu has had a 17-year rule – with a year’s break (Image: Getty)
More than 74% of eligible voters had cast ballots by 8pm, the highest turnout at that time in decades, and eight percentage points higher than in the last elections in 2022, according to the Central Elections Committee.
More than 7.0 million people are eligible to vote, and tens of thousands have reportedly arrived from overseas.
Israel’s president will be tasked with asking the party leader with the best prospect of forming a government, usually one with the most seats, to cobble together a coalition. If Mr Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud emerges as the largest party, he could claim that right.
There will, meanwhile, be heavy pressure on Mr Eisenkot to reach a deal with the Arab parties, while Mr Netanyahu and his allies are likely to cast any such alliance as illegitimate and even treasonous.
No single party has ever won an outright majority in the country’s 120-seat parliament, forcing political leaders to forge coalitions. Minority governments are also possible, but they must rely on support or co-operation from parties outside the government to pass legislation.
Donald Trump Takes Credit as Benjamin Netanyahu Gives Election ‘Victory Speech’
US President Donald Trump has claimed that his public endorsement helped Benjamin Netanyahu achieve a remarkable political comeback in Israel’s latest general election. As the Israeli Prime Minister addressed cheering supporters and delivered what appeared to be a victory speech, Trump was quick to take credit for the result, suggesting that his intervention had changed the direction of the election. However, despite Netanyahu’s confident appearance, the preliminary results revealed a complicated political situation, with neither major political bloc securing the parliamentary majority required to form a government.
The Israeli election, held on October 27, 2026, was widely regarded as a crucial moment for Netanyahu’s political future. After years of controversy, military conflict and growing domestic criticism, the Prime Minister was facing a serious challenge from opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot. Many observers believed that Netanyahu’s political position had become increasingly vulnerable, particularly following public dissatisfaction over security failures, the wars involving Israel and the country’s international reputation.
Against this background, Trump’s decision to publicly support Netanyahu attracted considerable attention. Just nine days before the election, the American President announced his complete endorsement of the Israeli leader through a statement on his Truth Social platform. Trump described Netanyahu as a great wartime leader and an important partner in protecting Israeli and American interests.
Trump also suggested that Israel needed a leader who could work closely with Washington, particularly regarding the continuing threat posed by Iran. His message was widely interpreted as an attempt to strengthen Netanyahu’s position among undecided voters and supporters who were questioning the government’s performance.
Following the election, Trump appeared convinced that his endorsement had made a significant difference. In a social media post, he shared comments suggesting that the political situation had dramatically changed after his intervention. The message described Netanyahu’s performance as a major comeback, moving from an expected defeat towards a possible victory.
Speaking to reporters, Trump also suggested that his support had helped Netanyahu perform better than expected. He indicated that the Israeli Prime Minister had exceeded expectations and that the endorsement had made a considerable difference to the election campaign.
However, the actual election results were more complicated than Trump’s comments suggested. Early exit polls had indicated that Netanyahu’s political bloc could struggle to retain power. As votes were counted, his Likud-led alliance moved ahead of its main rivals, but it still failed to secure the 61 seats required for a majority in Israel’s 120-member Knesset.
Preliminary figures reported on October 28 showed Netanyahu’s bloc with approximately 53 seats, compared with 48 seats for the main opposition bloc. Arab-led parties were projected to win around 19 seats. These figures demonstrated that Netanyahu remained politically competitive, but they did not establish a clear path to forming a stable government.
Despite this uncertainty, Netanyahu appeared determined to present the result as a political victory. Addressing supporters at his Likud party headquarters in Jerusalem, he expressed confidence that the final results would show his party as the largest political force in Israel.
He told the cheering crowd that Israel faced a historic opportunity and emphasised the importance of continuing its close relationship with President Trump. He also highlighted their shared objectives concerning Iran and regional security.
The Prime Minister’s speech was particularly significant because it demonstrated his determination to remain politically relevant despite years of criticism. For Netanyahu, performing better than many early predictions suggested was an important achievement. Even without a parliamentary majority, his party’s position could give him an opportunity to negotiate with other political groups and attempt to form another coalition government.
Trump’s involvement also highlights the increasingly personal relationship between the two leaders. Their political partnership has developed through cooperation on military, diplomatic and regional security issues. Trump has repeatedly presented Netanyahu as an important ally in his Middle East strategy, while the Israeli leader has sought to maintain strong support from Washington.
Nevertheless, American involvement in another country’s election is a sensitive issue. Traditionally, US presidents have generally avoided publicly endorsing individual candidates in foreign national elections. Trump’s decision to support Netanyahu therefore represented an unusual intervention in Israeli domestic politics.
His endorsement also created an interesting political dilemma. Although American support can strengthen a candidate’s international standing, Israeli voters ultimately determine their country’s political future. Netanyahu’s opponents argued that the election should be decided by Israeli citizens rather than influenced by statements from a foreign president.
Gadi Eisenkot, Netanyahu’s main political rival, emphasised that the election was an internal Israeli matter. He expressed respect for Trump but maintained that the country’s future leadership should be determined by the Israeli electorate.
The results also revealed the growing importance of Arab political representation. Arab-led parties performed strongly, potentially giving them considerable influence over the negotiations required to form a new government. Their increased parliamentary presence could make coalition-building more complicated for both Netanyahu and the opposition.
Israel’s political system is based on proportional representation, meaning that no single party normally wins enough seats to govern independently. Political leaders must therefore negotiate with smaller parties to establish a parliamentary majority. This process can take weeks and sometimes results in political deadlock or another election.
For Netanyahu, the immediate challenge is to convince potential coalition partners to support his government. Although his bloc emerged as the largest grouping in the preliminary count, its failure to reach 61 seats means that political negotiations will be essential.
The situation could also create difficulties for Trump. His public endorsement was intended to demonstrate support for Netanyahu, but an inconclusive election result means that the Israeli leader may still struggle to establish a stable administration. Trump may therefore face a complicated diplomatic situation if Israel enters another prolonged period of political uncertainty.
There are also wider implications for the Middle East. Both leaders have emphasised the importance of confronting Iran and strengthening regional security. Netanyahu has repeatedly argued that Iran represents a major threat to Israel, while Trump has presented close American-Israeli cooperation as central to his foreign policy.
However, Israel’s domestic political uncertainty could influence future decisions concerning regional conflicts, diplomatic negotiations and military strategy. A government struggling to maintain parliamentary support may face greater political pressure when making controversial decisions.
Another important issue is the continuing conflict in Gaza and the broader humanitarian situation across the region. Israel’s military actions have attracted international criticism, while Netanyahu’s government has faced growing questions about its long-term strategy. The election result does not automatically resolve these concerns, and the next government will continue to face difficult decisions involving security, diplomacy and relations with international partners.
For Trump, taking credit for Netanyahu’s improved election performance also serves a domestic political purpose. It allows him to present himself as an influential international leader capable of shaping political developments beyond America’s borders. By portraying his endorsement as decisive, he reinforces his image as someone whose political influence extends across international affairs.
Nevertheless, it is difficult to establish precisely how much Trump’s endorsement influenced Israeli voters. Other factors, including security concerns, economic conditions, party alliances and public dissatisfaction with the government, also played important roles. The improvement in Netanyahu’s position after Trump’s endorsement does not, by itself, prove that the American President was responsible for the outcome.
Ultimately, the election illustrates the complicated relationship between international influence and domestic democratic politics. Trump may believe that his support helped Netanyahu avoid a decisive defeat, while Netanyahu has used the relationship to reinforce his political message. However, the final parliamentary arithmetic remains the responsibility of Israeli voters and political parties.
In conclusion, Donald Trump’s decision to take credit for Benjamin Netanyahu’s improved election performance has added another dramatic dimension to Israel’s political developments. Netanyahu’s confident victory-style speech demonstrated his determination to remain in power, while Trump’s comments highlighted the importance he places on their personal and political partnership. Yet the absence of a clear parliamentary majority means that Netanyahu’s future remains uncertain. The coming coalition negotiations will determine whether he can translate his electoral performance into another term in government. For now, Trump may celebrate what he considers a political success, but the ultimate outcome will depend on Israel’s complex domestic political negotiations rather than American endorsement alone.