ANC leads by
191votes
Ward + municipal PR
2006 · Voting district
Voting district 65640034
ANC leads here
Results
Combined ballot votes
Combined ballot votes
AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESSANC
71.3%241 votes
INDEPENDENT DEMOCRATSID
14.8%50 votes
DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCEDA
12.7%43 votes
Other: show remaining parties: hide remaining parties1.2%4 votes
AFRICAN CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTYACDP
1.2%4 votes
| Party / entry | Candidate | Votes | Vote share (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS | — | 241 | 71,3018 |
| INDEPENDENT DEMOCRATS | — | 50 | 14,7929 |
| DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE | — | 43 | 12,7219 |
| AFRICAN CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY | — | 4 | 1,1834 |
338 valid votes. Shares use this ballot’s party totals. All published entries are included.
How the vote changed
Other
Ward + municipal PR votes by election
Swipe to see history
2000Vote %
DA84.9%—
ANC13.8%—
ID0.0%—
POSTMASBURG-OLIFANTSHOEK RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION1.4%—
ACDP0.0%—
2006Vote %vs 2000
DA12.7%
ANC71.3%
ID14.8%
POSTMASBURG-OLIFANTSHOEK RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION0.0%
ACDP1.2%
| Election | Party | Votes | Vote share (%) | Valid ballot total | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 000 | DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE | 185 | 84,8624 | 218 | Reported |
| 2 000 | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS | 30 | 13,7615 | 218 | Reported |
| 2 000 | INDEPENDENT DEMOCRATS | 0 | 0 | 218 | No votes recorded in the complete party list. |
| 2 000 | POSTMASBURG-OLIFANTSHOEK RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION | 3 | 1,3761 | 218 | Reported |
| 2 000 | AFRICAN CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY | 0 | 0 | 218 | No votes recorded in the complete party list. |
| 2 006 | DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE | 43 | 12,7219 | 338 | Reported |
| 2 006 | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS | 241 | 71,3018 | 338 | Reported |
| 2 006 | INDEPENDENT DEMOCRATS | 50 | 14,7929 | 338 | Reported |
| 2 006 | POSTMASBURG-OLIFANTSHOEK RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION | 0 | 0 | 338 | No votes recorded in the complete party list. |
| 2 006 | AFRICAN CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY | 4 | 1,1834 | 338 | Reported |
Ward + municipal PR votes. Missing and grouped entries are not assumed to be zero. Published boundaries may differ between elections.
History data & sources
Ward + municipal PR votes. Connecting bands show the same party’s share or seats between elections, not individual voters moving between parties. Select a year to inspect its values; use the election-year selector to explore its results and places.
The chart names the five largest parties across these elections. The vote list also names parties gaining at least 2 percentage points since the previous election; remaining votes are combined under Other. Other’s change compares the same group of parties in both elections. Missing values remain unavailable.
- All points use the same ballot basis. Ballot totals are not counts of individual voters.
- Missing or grouped party rows remain gaps unless a complete, ungrouped list establishes zero votes.
- Municipal boundaries can change between elections. Published area results are not boundary-adjusted.
Explore nearby
Sources & result details
IEC: 29 Jul 2016, 09:34 SAST · checked 05 Nov 2026, 15:55 SAST
Historical comparisons use published area results. Boundaries may change between elections. Vote shares use the ballot labelled on each chart; ballots are not individual voters.
Ward vs PR ballots
Ward: choose a person. PR: choose a party.
Ward ballot
The candidate with the most votes in the whole ward wins one seat. They do not need more than 50%.
Municipal PR ballot
PR means proportional representation. Party-list seats balance the council’s overall party representation.
Two ballots work together
Party ward votes and municipal PR votes both count towards the party’s overall seat allocation.
Outside metros, voters also have a separate district PR ballot. An independent can stand in a ward but not on a party PR list.
IEC guide to council seats