See also here:

Click to access %D7%94%D7%90%D7%9D-%D7%99%D7%A9-%D7%98%D7%A2%D7%9D-%D7%9C%D7%94%D7%A6%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A2-%D7%91%D7%91%D7%97%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%A8%D7%A6%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%96%D7%9D-%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%A8%D7%9B%D7%99%D7%96%D7%9D-%D7%95%D7%94%D7%A6%D7%95-%D7%94%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%99%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%99-1.pdf

What about the lesser evil?

I was trying to remember the link, and now you reminded me:

על ההצבעה: שיקולי הרע במיעוטו (טור 189)

I don’t understand why the Rabbi calls what the Haredim receive “bribery.” Every party has demands (Liberman wants stipends for elderly people from Ukraine), and within the current system of government that’s how it works. The discussion could perhaps be whether what the Haredim get is a legitimate demand, or whether there is no legitimacy at all to the money they receive. In the end, anyone who doesn’t automatically believe the media and knows a few people from the Haredi public knows that they receive very little, and therefore those who don’t work also usually live in poverty—but of course that is their personal choice.
For example, I’m angry about sports funding; in my eyes it’s a waste of money and doesn’t interest me at all, and in my opinion if a party came on behalf of sports in order to fund them, that too would be election bribery, etc.

Because ordinary parties get funding for needs in line with their views, whereas the Haredim get funding for the needs of a particular public. Beyond that, usually the giver identifies with the goal, whereas regarding the Haredim that isn’t the case (the coalition doesn’t identify with it but pays it as a bribe). I didn’t mean bribery in the criminal sense, of course, but rather that they won’t make any trouble on any issue as long as they’re paid.
Someone who doesn’t work should live in poverty. That doesn’t impress me (I am impressed by the self-sacrifice, but not by the little they receive). Especially since their contribution to GDP is negligible, and that’s a problem for all of us. Instead of saving this sick society, they keep it going. That’s what I call bribery.

But there too, funding for the needs of the public is the worldview. And that’s why the women work so that the husband can sit and learn.
And as mentioned in Maimonides:

“The sages and prophets did not long for the days of the Messiah in order that they might rule over the whole world, nor in order that they might dominate the gentiles, nor in order that they might be exalted by the nations, nor in order to eat and drink and rejoice, but in order that they might be free for Torah and its wisdom, with no oppressor or disturber, so that they might merit the life of the World to Come, as we explained in the Laws of Repentance.”

Why did you decide to refrain from voting instead of putting in a blank ballot?

(Once you wrote that a blank ballot has more significance than not voting, because it shows protest, unlike not voting, which could be interpreted as laziness or indifference.)

Under the law, blank ballots are not counted, apparently in order to prevent that kind of protest. The scum take care of themselves.

I’m in a Hasidic community affiliated with United Torah Judaism. At the polling stations, observers sit with lists and pass in real time to headquarters the names of those who still haven’t voted.

So I get nonstop phone calls throughout Election Day until I vote.

For this reason I’m thinking of putting in a blank ballot (and I hope they won’t falsify my envelope when the votes are counted).

Is their behavior legal?

I don’t know whether it’s legal, but all the parties do it.

With God’s help, 16 Elul 5779

To the owner of the blank ballot—greetings,

A blank ballot is not neutral; it strengthens the left.

Left-wing figures like Lapid and Liberman are fighting against the Haredim not out of a sincere aspiration to repair the problems of Haredi society and increase their integration into economic life, but מתוך an understanding that hatred of the Haredim is a recipe for gathering votes from part of the secular public.

Instead of encouraging the processes of entering the workforce, education, and army service—which are advancing slowly but surely—these guys push for decrees that the Haredi public (and the army too) will not be able to withstand. What they gain from these decrees is not an increase in the number of Haredim enlisting, but greater economic pressure on Haredi society. If it is so important to them that they go out to work, why do they harass the Haredi colleges? And why do they make it harder for working Haredi women to receive daycare discounts?

Those who really are acting, and from an attitude of respect and patience, to increase Haredi integration into the army and working life are Mr. Naftali Bennett, who as Minister of the Economy formulated practical plans to promote Haredi employment, and Mrs. Ayelet Shaked, who prepared a reasonable outline for a draft law that could have led to a moderate increase in the number enlisting without bringing destruction upon Haredi society.

So, for the sake of the changes you hope to see in your own society, you should act to strengthen the power of those who truly want to improve and advance the condition of Haredi society—with respect and patience, and not with cheap populism.

With the blessing of a good note,
S.Z. Levinger

And as the third round approaches, does the Rabbi still hold to his intention not to vote?

Far more so than before.

What about Ozma Yehudit economically liberal?
https://smb.org.il/#matza
Something like Zehut 2.

I considered that, but in the end I’m inclined not to vote for them. There’s the practical consideration (they’re nowhere near the electoral threshold, not even with a telescope). But beyond that, I’ve lost trust in those guys. They’re a bit childish, and Feiglin is the father of them all.
But I can בהחלט understand someone who votes for them by force of the categorical imperative, etc.