What’s Driving Voters in the 2025 Federal Election? A Deeper Look Beyond the Horserace
April 22, 2025
If you’ve followed our polling during this campaign, you’ll know we’ve gone beyond the usual vote intention numbers. Yes, we track the horserace. But to really understand where this election is going—and why—we’ve asked Canadians more questions than any other pollster: about what they care about, what they fear, what they hope for, and what they believe.
And what’s emerged is a clear, nuanced picture of what’s motivating supporters of each major party. In an election shaped by economic strain, geopolitical anxiety, and a new Liberal leader in Mark Carney, understanding what’s driving people is just as important as knowing how they’ll vote.
Here’s what we’ve learned.
Liberals: Steady Hands in Stormy Weather
For Liberal supporters, this election is about stability. They’re not immune to frustration about affordability, housing, or healthcare—but their vote is fundamentally shaped by the belief that the world is dangerous and uncertain, and that someone competent needs to be in charge.
The return of Donald Trump as U.S. President defined that mindset. His threats to annex parts of Canada and the imposition of tariffs have elevated anxiety and shifted people into a precarity mindset. For many voters, this election became about choosing the leader best equipped to navigate a rough storm. And in their minds, that leader is Mark Carney.
Carney’s brand—calm, credible, globally connected—is well aligned with these anxieties. Liberal voters aren’t just supporting a party; they’re backing a leadership style they believe can protect Canada from chaos, both economic and political.
In short, the Liberal coalition is being held together by a sense that we can’t afford to roll the dice right now.
Conservatives: The Urge to Regain Control
The Conservative base is motivated by a very different emotional current: a deep desire to reclaim control.
Control over the cost of living. Over borders and immigration. Over national identity and narrative. Their support is rooted not just in economic anxiety, but in a broader discomfort with what feels like a country slipping out of their hands.
This mindset has been building for some time, but it’s been supercharged by the feeling that the political class is out of touch. For these voters, inflation isn’t just a policy problem—it’s proof that Ottawa doesn’t get it. Immigration isn’t just a demographic trend—it’s a symbol of lost control. And Trump’s threats? They’re frustrating, yes, but many Conservatives are more angry that Canada seems unable to respond with strength or resolve.
Pierre Poilievre’s appeal to these voters lies in his clarity and combativeness. He doesn’t equivocate. He blames. He promises to “axe” the carbon tax, “fire” the gatekeepers, and “take back” control. For many Conservatives, that bluntness is not a flaw—it’s the point.
They want to change the channel, not fine-tune the volume.
NDP: Fixing What’s Broken
New Democrats are driven by a conviction that the system isn’t working—for anyone but the very few.
Their supporters talk about affordability, but they frame it differently. It’s not just about prices. It’s about fairness. It’s about the belief that housing, healthcare, and basic services should be rights, not privileges. Their worldview is more global and more idealistic, connecting local struggles with international inequality, foreign policy independence, and environmental justice.
In many ways, the NDP vote is the most emotionally aspirational. These voters aren’t just reacting to fear or uncertainty—they’re pushing for something better, something fairer. The problem is, they’re often caught between wanting that bold change and fearing the cost of splitting the progressive vote.
Still, the people voting NDP in this election believe deeply that another Canada is possible. Their support is powered by a mix of frustration and hope—a sense that we can do better, and that someone needs to fight for it.
Bloc Québécois: Identity, Pride, and Protection
Bloc supporters are different. Their motivations don’t fit neatly into a left-right spectrum because their politics is, first and foremost, about Quebec.
Their top concerns—whether the economy, immigration, or language—are always filtered through a lens of cultural preservation and regional pride. They want to protect the French language. They want control over immigration policy. They want a government that prioritizes Quebec, not just accommodates it.
In our polling, Bloc voters frequently reference “choisir un chef fort” (choose a strong leader) and “économie et la langue.” These aren’t abstractions. They reflect a deeper desire for self-determination and dignity in a federation that often feels dismissive of Quebec’s uniqueness.
And while the Bloc may not form government, their voters aren’t sending a message—they’re asserting an identity. They vote to be heard. And that motivation is powerful.
Why It Matters
When we reduce elections to bar graphs and decimal points, we risk missing the human stories underneath. This campaign is about far more than who’s ahead. It’s about how Canadians feel in a moment of enormous flux—economically, culturally, and geopolitically.
Some want stability. Some want control. Some want fairness. Some want recognition.
Our job as pollsters isn’t just to measure public opinion—it’s to help interpret it. And after thousands of interviews over the course of this campaign, one thing is clear: this election is not just a referendum on the past decade. It’s a reckoning with the kind of country people believe we should become.
Understanding what drives voters doesn’t just help predict the outcome. It helps explain why the outcome matters.
And that, in the end, is what public opinion is all about.
Methodology
The survey was conducted with 2,000 adult Canadians over the age of 18 from April 18 to 21, 2025. A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.
The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.3%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
This survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.
Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/
Binary Logistic Regression
To identify the key predictors of support for the Liberal Party under Mark Carney’s leadership, we used a binary logistic regression model. This statistical technique estimates the likelihood that a respondent chooses a particular outcome—in this case, voting Liberal—based on a set of independent variables.
Unlike linear regression, which predicts a continuous outcome, logistic regression is used when the dependent variable is binary (e.g., support vs. no support). The model calculates the probability that an individual will vote Liberal, based on factors such as personal impressions of the leaders, issue priorities, demographic characteristics, and views on the state of the country.
The coefficients from the model represent the change in the log-odds of voting Liberal associated with each predictor, holding all other variables constant. A positive coefficient indicates an increased likelihood of voting Liberal, while a negative coefficient suggests a decreased likelihood.
This method allows us to isolate the individual impact of each factor and identify which attributes are most strongly associated with support for the Liberals—offering a more precise understanding of what’s driving voter behaviour in the current election context.
While traditional R-squared (as used in linear regression) doesn’t directly apply to logistic regression, we use pseudo R-squared measures to assess model fit.
- Nagelkerke’s R-squared (0.7078) is an adjusted version of the Cox & Snell R-squared, scaled to range between 0 and 1. It suggests that the model explains approximately 71% of the variation in vote intention—indicating strong explanatory power for a social science model.
- McFadden’s rho-squared (0.7001) is another commonly used pseudo R-squared that compares the fit of the full model against a null (intercept-only) model. Values above 0.4 are typically considered indicative of a very good model fit.
Both values suggest this logistic model provides a robust and meaningful explanation for what drives someone to vote Liberal in this election scenario.
ABOUT ABACUS DATA
We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.
We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail, and exceptional value.
And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.
Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.
Contact us with any questions.
Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.
