The Blich Myth: The Prophet Who No Longer Predicts - Why Did the Prophecy Stop in 1992? | Dr. Eitan Lesri
Dr. Eitan Lesri analyzes the "Blich sample" myth, showing that the school's predictive ability effectively stopped in 1992. Since then, out of 5 elections examined from 2006, Blich correctly predicted the winning party only once. The conclusion: Blich is not a representative sample of Israel, and its true value is educational, not predictive.
Dr. Eitan Lesri analyzes the media and public myth of the "Blich sample" as a supposed national barometer for predicting election results. He shows that the belief in the school's prophetic ability was born from two historical turning points: the 1977 political upheaval, when Blich students voted toward Likud, and Rabin's victory in 1992, when they correctly identified Labor's win. However, he argues that two historical successes do not constitute a sampling prediction method. Since 1992, Blich student voting has struggled to reflect national ballot box results. Out of 5 election cycles examined since 2006, only once (2006) did Blich clearly predict the winning party. In 3 cycles (2013, 2015, 2022) it predicted a leading party different from the one actually elected, and in one cycle (2019a) there was a huge gap in favor of Blue and White that did not materialize. The statistical explanation: Blich is not a representative sample of Israeli society, but a young student population concentrated in a specific geographic and socioeconomic area (Ramat Gan). Lesri concludes that Blich's true value is educational—providing a first opportunity to experience democracy—and not as a national prediction tool.