Is this really an open question? It sounds simple to me. Your vote raises the likelihood that someone from your party becomes the pivotal voter by a tiny amount. It's like increasing your share on a pie chart when someone is blindly shooting at it and the color that gets hit wins. People care about their candidate winning, not about personally deciding the election.
Here in Oslo, the local elections some years ago was decided by six votes out of about 300k votes (~500k eligible), between a left-leaning majority and a right-leaning majority.
It's often close but not that close.
it's not hard to come up with an aggregate social welfare valuation of many billions of dollars for this election, especially considering the effects on non-Israelis also
So here the case for voting, at a cost of thousands of dollars, is rather straightforwardly rational, assuming only that one is somewhat unselfish; and possibly even if one is selfish the individual stakes could be equivalent to thousands of dollars