Today, Mark Carney’s new government took office, and Canadians received their first clear look at how the Liberals intend to govern following a tightly contested 2025 election.
In my view, it’s clear the cabinet composition reflects the challenging balancing act Carney faces between meeting heightened public expectations, distancing his government from Trudeau’s unpopular legacy, and managing competing domestic and international demands.
Carney inherits an electorate marked by significant anxiety, transitioning from a scarcity mindset—focused on immediate affordability—to a deeper sense of precarity, triggered primarily by threats from President Donald Trump. Abacus Data’s polling throughout the campaign clearly identified two duelling ballot questions: managing the existential threat posed by Trump and delivering meaningful economic and social change at home. Carney’s cabinet choices today needed to signal to voters that he is fully attuned to these dual concerns (we will be tracking this in our next national survey).
Carney’s personal image remains strong post-election (from our post-election survey), notably scoring high on key attributes such as being “smart”, “ready to be Prime Minister”, and “principled”. He notably lagged on relatability, underscoring the importance of surrounding himself with cabinet ministers perceived as grounded and connected to everyday concerns, particularly housing affordability, healthcare, and cost of living—areas identified by Canadians as urgent priorities.
Our polling clearly illustrates the public’s continued focus on economic anxiety. Half of Canadians (50%) want immediate tax relief, reinforcing Carney’s promise of income tax cuts for middle-class and dual-income families. Additionally, cancelling the federal carbon tax remains a critical concern, supported by 40% of voters, highlighting the ongoing sensitivity around energy prices and affordability. With housing, dental care, and housing all tied at 36% each in voters’ minds, today’s cabinet announcement needed to send a strong signal that the new government places a priority on these areas by including decisive voices into cabinet positions responsible for housing and infrastructure, health, and immigration.
Beyond these specifics, Carney’s cabinet selections must also visibly demonstrate a break from Trudeau’s era while offering some stability. Our polling was unequivocal: had Trudeau remained Liberal leader, the party faced certain defeat. Carney’s victory was contingent upon voters believing he represented genuine change. To maintain and solidify this perception, his cabinet choices today should clearly showcase a fresh start. Appointing new, credible figures who weren’t closely tied to Trudeau’s cabinet would visibly underscore the distinction voters expect.
While cabinet choices are important, our 2024 research on the recognizability of political leaders and cabinet ministers reminds us that few cabinet ministers ever become widely recognized figures among the Canadian public. Almost all of the accountability, responsibility, and reputational weight of the government ultimately rests on the leader’s shoulders—a reality vividly demonstrated by how quickly public perceptions shifted following Justin Trudeau’s departure. For Carney, this underscores the need for a cabinet capable of effective governance and public service, even if most ministers remain relatively unknown to Canadians.
Simultaneously, Carney must respond decisively to Trump’s ongoing threats and aggressive economic posture. Nearly half (45%) of Canadians still identify managing the impact of Trump’s decisions as critical to their voting decision, and overwhelmingly trust Carney’s Liberals over Poilievre’s Conservatives to handle this challenge. Key security and foreign policy appointments will send a strong signal domestically and internationally about Canada’s strategic posture under Carney.
Critically, today’s cabinet announcement will also influence whether voters believe Carney can deliver on the “change” mandate that grew dominant as election day approached. Capturing 30% of voters who prioritized change despite leading the incumbent party was a significant achievement. Keeping these voters onboard will depend heavily on tangible policy results delivered quickly and effectively by this new cabinet.
In forming his first cabinet, Carney has brought together experienced figures alongside fresh faces. Gregor Robertson, the former Mayor of Vancouver and a new MP, takes on the significant task of Minister of Housing and Infrastructure, reflecting Carney’s promise to build 500,000 new homes. Robertson’s municipal experience may be particularly valuable in navigating federal-municipal relations critical to housing policy. David McGuinty moves from Public Safety to Minister of National Defence, tasked with scaling up the Canadian Armed Forces and meeting Canada’s NATO defence commitments.
Evan Solomon, newly elected from downtown Toronto, assumes responsibility for the new portfolio of Artificial Intelligence, signaling a commitment to addressing both opportunities and disruptive challenges of emerging technology. Anita Anand moves into the pivotal role of Foreign Minister, where she will navigate complex international dynamics, particularly in managing the critical relationship with the United States under President Trump. François-Philippe Champagne retains his position as Minister of Finance, providing continuity and reassurance on economic management. Melanie Joly transitions from Foreign Affairs to Industry Minister, with an emphasis on industry, rather than innovation.
Tim Hodgson, another notable newcomer elected as an MP, becomes Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson, who previously served as CEO of Goldman Sachs Canada and Chair of Hydro One, brings extensive financial and industry experience, likely enhancing confidence in Canada’s energy policy direction.
What this all means?
Many Canadians will be watching, not just for early policy signals in the Throne Speech, but for reassurance that Carney’s team truly reflects the urgent priorities they voiced clearly during the election: protection from insecurity, economic growth (strongest economy in the G7), housing affordability, and secure management of a tumultuous relationship with the United States. The success of this cabinet will ultimately rest on Carney’s ability to reassure voters that their concerns, deeply rooted in precarity, are being heard, understood, and decisively acted upon.
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 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.
In uncertain times, clear, credible, and actionable information becomes a critical lifeline. As Canadians move from a scarcity mindset—focused primarily on immediate concerns like housing, groceries, and bills—to a precarity mindset, characterized by deep uncertainty about long-term stability, organizations must rethink how they engage and communicate with their audiences.
Today, simply presenting data isn’t enough. The true value of market research and public opinion polling lies in transforming insights into authentic stories that resonate emotionally and foster trust.
Our team at Abacus Data believes good decisions require good data.
But even more fundamentally, our purpose is identifying the unmet needs of your audience and helping you address those needs first. In this moment, those needs have shifted from purely practical concerns to emotional ones—such as reassurance, validation, and credible hope. Meeting these emotional needs effectively demands the integration of narrative storytelling into how we present research findings.
Narratives are uniquely powerful because they move beyond the abstract world of numbers to human experiences that audiences instinctively understand and relate to. Our experience consistently shows that stories structured around a clear arc—challenge, support, and outcome—build deeper emotional connections, increase audience engagement, and significantly enhance trust. In an age defined by precarity, where trust itself is scarce, authentic storytelling becomes indispensable.
For industry associations, leveraging storytelling grounded in solid research can strengthen community bonds and clarify purpose. Imagine an association whose members are concerned about regulatory changes or uncertain economic forecasts. Robust, credible research enables the association to genuinely hear and validate members’ concerns, translating those insights into effective, member-driven advocacy. This isn’t merely representation; it’s empowerment. Research thus moves from being a budget line-item to a foundational strategy that builds member trust and tangible impact.
Corporations engaged in public affairs and advocacy deeply understand the risks associated with misinterpreting public sentiment. In today’s precarious environment, evidence-based communication isn’t merely advantageous—it’s essential. Polling acts as critical risk management, enabling organizations to craft messages with precision, clarity, and transparency. When a company uses rigorous, independent research to genuinely acknowledge and address public concerns, trust naturally follows. This approach effectively converts polling data into meaningful influence, ensuring the organization’s voice isn’t just heard, but respected and believed.
For consumer-facing brands, the shift toward a precarity mindset has resulted in more discerning, cautious, and values-driven Canadian consumers. Today, brand loyalty hinges not simply on product quality or pricing, but on perceived authenticity and shared values. Consumers quickly detect when brand narratives don’t align with their lived realities. Thorough consumer research enables brands to authentically reflect their customers’ experiences and aspirations, forging emotional bonds far beyond transactional relationships. The brands that invest deeply in understanding their audience’s true values and narratives are the ones that earn lasting consumer loyalty through genuine empathy and connection.
Across all these groups—associations, corporations, and consumer brands—one common theme emerges clearly: the precarity mindset demands emotional resonance and trust above all else. While market research and polling data provide essential insights, it’s the compelling narratives derived from these insights that ultimately connect meaningfully with audiences seeking reassurance and clarity. And that’s what our team is the best at and what make us different. We find the unmet need and build strategies to help you fill them, first.
The future of impactful communications exists at the intersection of insightful data and authentic storytelling. This approach isn’t just about persuasion; it’s about delivering profound credibility at a moment when credibility itself is especially fragile.
As your organization navigates the uncertainties ahead, consider this carefully: are you merely presenting numbers, or are you telling the kind of stories that illuminate pathways, foster trust, and address the real emotional needs of your audience? Are you using insights and research to build concensus and drive action? Are you measuring the impact of your decisions and know if things are working as they should?
My job is to ensure your stakeholders feel genuinely heard, deeply understood, and fundamentally reassured. Good data brings clarity—but compelling storytelling makes the journey both meaningful and memorable.
Reach out to our team and let us know how we can help you navigate through this uncertain moment in our history.
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 polling during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.
For much of 2023 and 2024, Canadians were deeply entrenched in a scarcity mindset—a psychological state characterized by anxiety about the accessibility and affordability of basic necessities. This mindset had profound political implications, creating widespread discontent. Life felt perpetually uncertain, with essential items and services harder to obtain, increasingly expensive, and prone to sudden loss. Such sentiments inevitably translated into fierce anti-incumbent sentiment, a trend vividly captured by the Financial Times’ global analysis showing 2024 as one of the worst years for incumbent governments globally in over 100 years. Whether it was Biden’s Democratic Party in the US or Macron’s coalition in France, not a single ruling parties anywhere saw its popular support increase from the previous time it faced voters.
Canada was no exception. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government, already battered by growing dissatisfaction over affordability and economic insecurity, faced catastrophic polling numbers by late 2024. When Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland resigned in December, just 12% of Canadians believed the Liberal government deserved re-election—a clear indictment of voter fatigue and desire for change. Trudeau’s subsequent resignation announcement plunged the party into unprecedented depths, with the Liberals trailing Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives by a remarkable 27 points—47% to 20%, the largest margin Abacus Data had ever measured in its extensive polling history.
Yet, the narrative quickly shifted following a seismic political event south of the border. Donald Trump’s return to the US presidency in January 2025 drastically reshaped the Canadian electoral landscape. Trump’s provocative talk of annexing Canada and threats and then the imposition of aggressive tariffs swiftly replaced domestic scarcity concerns with an even more profound feeling: precarity. Unlike scarcity, precarity is rooted in deep-seated fears about the stability and reliability of foundational systems—employment, healthcare, economic independence, national security. The Canadian public was gripped by uncertainty, worried not just about immediate survival but the integrity of long-term societal structures.
In this atmosphere of heightened anxiety, Mark Carney’s entry into the Liberal leadership race was impeccably timed. Carney—a figure synonymous with steady-handed economic stewardship from his tenure as Governor of both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England—represented precisely the leadership style voters craved amidst turmoil. His subsequent victory was not just a leadership win but a complete reset in public perception about federal governance. Indeed, Abacus Data’s extensive tracking illustrates a dramatic recovery in government approval immediately following Carney’s assumption of office, surging from a paltry 27% approval to an impressive 43% in mere weeks. Carney quickly became the reassuring figure voters felt could capably address the imminent threat posed by Trump’s America and Justin Trudeau was now in the rearview window.
Heading into the 2025 election, two distinct ballot questions emerged, deeply dividing the electorate: handling the Trump threat versus delivering political and economic change. Initially, Trump dominated the narrative; voters prioritized security and stability, heavily favouring the Liberals, who enjoyed an overwhelming advantage on handling relations with Trump. Indeed, among the 21% of voters who saw Trump as the most critical issue, a staggering 76% thought the Liberals could best deal with the issue compared to just 13% for Conservatives. The Conservatives, in contrast, lead by 11-points, when those who ranked the cost of living as the top issue were asked which party could best deal with that issue.
However, as the campaign progressed, the salience of the Trump issue waned slightly, replaced increasingly by voters’ desire for change. By election day, 55% of Canadians saw “change” as their primary voting determinant, significantly up from earlier polling waves conducted by Abacus Data. This shift dramatically favoured the Conservatives, with 57% of these “change voters” supporting Poilievre’s party versus 30% for the Liberals.
Still, Carney’s leadership effectively mitigated the damage from this shift. Critically, he captured a substantial 30% of “change voters,” illustrating his success in distancing himself from Trudeau’s unpopular legacy. Trudeau was undeniably Carney’s kryptonite, just as Trump was Poilievre’s. Without Trudeau’s departure, Abacus Data’s hypothetical polling indicates the Liberals would have suffered a severe loss, polling just 28% compared to the Conservatives’ 46%.
Carney’s positive impact on the Liberals was underscored by voter impressions. Both major party leaders finished the campaign with net positive ratings—remarkable given the polarized political environment. Carney, notably, ended with an impressive +17 net approval, remarkably stable throughout the campaign. Poilievre also managed a respectable +2, signifying widespread recognition of his focus on economic and social change, though clearly overshadowed by Carney’s aura of expertise and stability.
Leadership attributes emerged as pivotal determinants in voter decisions. Abacus Data’s polling revealed that voters viewed Carney significantly more favourably on key leadership metrics: “standing up to a bully” (46% Carney vs. 38% Poilievre) and “captaining a ship through a bad storm” (40% Carney vs. 35% Poilievre). Carney’s commanding lead in these areas underscored voters’ yearning for stability and reassurance.
The ultimate election result reflected these nuanced dynamics. Liberals narrowly edged Conservatives nationally, securing 44% of the vote to the Conservatives’ 41%, while the NDP collapsed to just 6%, its worst performance historically. This result was decisively shaped by voter flows.
Notably, the Liberals lost 16% of their 2021 voters directly to the Conservatives but significantly compensated by winning 42% of former NDP voters, while Conservatives gained 21% of past NDP voters. This voter shift encapsulates the electoral dynamics perfectly: progressive voters, fearing Trump, strategically consolidated around Carney’s Liberals.
Age demographics also played a critical role. The Liberals performed strongest among voters over 60, gaining a remarkable 19 points compared to 2021. Conversely, Conservatives showed the strongest gains among voters aged 30 to 44, increasing their vote share by 17 points, highlighting generational divides in election priorities.
Abacus Data’s Precarity Index clearly demonstrated precarity’s electoral significance. Among high-precarity voters, Liberals outperformed Conservatives significantly (49% to 35%). Remarkably, 42% of high-precarity Liberal voters did not vote Liberal in 2021—most having supported the NDP or abstained entirely. This underscores the Liberals’ success in attracting voters profoundly concerned about long-term stability and systemic risks.
Carney’s personal appeal was evident in detailed image assessments conducted by Abacus Data. He scored highly on trustworthiness, competence, and the ability to unite Canadians. However, Carney wasn’t perceived as particularly “in touch” with everyday Canadians—a significant departure from past elections, where relatability was seen as a crucial trait. Notably, Carney openly admitted on Radio Canada TV that he does not do his own grocery shopping. Despite this, almost half of Canadians had a positive view of Mr. Carney, underscoring his broad electoral appeal.
When compared with Poilievre, Carney was ahead by 13 on “smart”, by 9 on “ready to be Prime Minister”, by 6 on “a leader” and by 7 on “principled”. The only areas where Poilievre beat Carney were “mean” by 13 points, hypocritical by 5, and on tough by just one point.
Policy preferences post-election clearly prioritize immediate economic relief and security: tax cuts, permanent dental care, and mental health funding ranked as top priorities among voters, highlighting continued economic anxiety and the desire for systemic reassurance.
We asked Canadians what three issues they want the new Carney government to prioritize, and the results underscore their continuing desire for immediate economic relief, improved affordability, but also protection from the precarity.
Half (50%) identified cutting income taxes as one of their top three priorities, clearly highlighting ongoing economic anxiety and a strong preference for direct financial relief. Cancelling the carbon tax ranked second at 40%, reflecting continued sensitivity around cost-of-living concerns tied to energy prices. Additionally, 36% of respondents equally prioritized dental care, building 500,000 new homes, and capping temporary immigration, highlighting a balanced demand for investments in healthcare, housing affordability, and controlled population growth. Mental health funding (28%) also featured prominently, underscoring the public’s recognition of mental health as an integral aspect of overall well-being in an era marked by persistent uncertainty. Collectively, this data suggests Canadians expect swift action from the government on pocketbook issues and tangible policy interventions aimed at securing both short-term relief and longer-term stability.
The Upshot
Reflecting on the 2025 election, three interconnected events reshaped Canada’s political trajectory: Trump’s re-election, Trudeau’s resignation, and Carney’s emergence as Liberal leader. Each was indispensable. Trump refocused Canadians on existential risks, Trudeau’s departure offered the Liberals a desperately needed reset, and Carney’s leadership provided voters with confidence amid deepening precarity. Without any of these factors, the Liberal victory would likely have been impossible.
The 2025 Canadian federal election serves as a clear example of how quickly voter sentiment can shift under the influence of external events and internal party dynamics. While the election was not exclusively about Donald Trump, it was undeniably shaped by his return to power and provocative interventions. Trump’s threats of annexation and aggressive tariffs fundamentally altered the electoral landscape, swiftly transitioning Canadians from a scarcity mindset—concerned primarily with affordability and immediate economic pressures—to a precarity mindset, characterized by deeper anxieties over national security, long-term stability, and systemic reliability.
For anyone in public affairs, several useful insights emerge from this election:
Firstly, the resilience of leadership narratives cannot be overstated. Mark Carney’s success demonstrates that in moments of crisis, voters prioritize perceived competence and stability above relatability. Despite being openly detached from everyday experiences—highlighted starkly by his own admission of not doing his grocery shopping—Carney triumphed because voters were searching not for a relatable figure but for a reassuring presence capable of managing threats and delivering systemic stability. The public’s strong preference for Carney’s leadership traits, such as “standing up to a bully” and effectively “captaining a ship through a bad storm,” underscores the premium placed on decisive, authoritative leadership during precarious times.
Secondly, the dramatic shift in public opinion following Trudeau’s resignation cannot be ignored. Abacus Data’s hypothetical scenarios clearly illustrate that had Trudeau remained leader, the Liberals would have faced electoral disaster, polling at just 28% compared to the Conservatives’ commanding 46%. This highlights how strongly Trudeau had become synonymous with voter frustration and dissatisfaction. The Liberals’ recovery hinged on their ability to distance themselves from Trudeau’s legacy, allowing Carney to reposition the party as credible guardians of national interest and stability. Carney would be wise to reflect on that and find ways to demonstrate this distance from the Trudeau era both in substance and process.
Thirdly, strategic framing of ballot questions significantly impacted voter alignment. Throughout the campaign, two dominant narratives competed: the existential threat posed by Trump’s America versus the widespread desire for economic and political change domestically. Carney adeptly managed this duality by capturing a significant share of “change voters,” despite the Liberals’ incumbency. This indicates that effective campaign strategy involves not only addressing primary voter concerns but also skillfully positioning oneself as capable of managing multiple competing narratives simultaneously. Something the Conservatives failed to do sufficiently.
Moreover, the collapse of the NDP vote—down to a historic low of 6%—offers a critical lesson in electoral realignment driven by strategic voting. Progressive voters, alarmed by Trump’s aggressive posture and anxious about the stability of Canadian society, overwhelmingly consolidated around the Liberals, abandoning the NDP. This underscores the volatility and fluidity of voter allegiance during periods of heightened insecurity, revealing an opportunity and challenge for parties to effectively communicate relevance and urgency.
Finally,we should recognize the enduring significance of economic reassurance as a policy priority. Even post-election, voters remain deeply concerned about affordability, healthcare accessibility, and financial security. Policies aimed at addressing these areas—tax relief, dental care expansion, mental health funding—resonate strongly, reflecting the precarity mindset’s emphasis on long-term systemic stability.
The 2025 election illustrates the potent interplay between external crises, leadership perception, and voter psychology. Anyone in public affairs needs to be acutely aware of how rapidly shifting circumstances and targeted interventions by external actors—like Trump—can profoundly reshape electoral dynamics, redefining what voters demand from their leaders and their government.
Good research and the best public opinion advisors can help you navigate this complexity by providing timely insights into shifting voter priorities, clearly mapping the dynamics driving public sentiment, and identifying opportunities to effectively communicate your message.
Team Abacus exactly this—trusted, influential, precise, and actionable insights that make us the best in the business and essential partners for understanding and responding to rapidly changing electoral landscapes.
Data in this analysis comes from…
A post-election survey conducted with 1,500 adult Canadians over the age of 18 from April 29 to May 2, 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 +/- 2.6%, 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.
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.
For more than a decade, we’ve tracked the changing views, anxieties, and aspirations of Canadians. As pollsters, we’ve had the privilege of seeing not only how public opinion shifts, but why it does. Today, we believe we are at a defining juncture in the national mindset—one that has urgent implications not only for politicians and policymakers, but for anyone in the business of persuasion: marketers, advertisers, media executives, and storytellers.
What we are witnessing is a shift from a scarcity mindset to what we call a precarity mindset. For years, Canadians struggled with scarcity: rising housing costs, long wait times for healthcare, job insecurity, and stretched household budgets. People worried about getting through the month. But now, those same people—and millions more—are starting to wonder if the future itself is stable. The fear is no longer just, “Can I afford groceries this week?” It’s becoming, “Will there be a healthcare system when I need it? Will my job exist in two years? Will Canada even be safe from geopolitical threats?”
This shift is not theoretical. It’s measurable, visible, and accelerating. It is redefining how Canadians make choices, whom they trust, and what they demand from institutions, including brands. If you want to reach, move, or retain your audience in this environment, you need to understand how a precarity mindset works and what it means for engagement.
Let us walk you through what our latest data tells us.
Understanding the Precarity Mindset
Over the past year, Abacus Data has developed a “Precarity Index” to better understand how Canadians are experiencing this growing sense of instability. It goes beyond simple income-based measures or headline-grabbing inflation rates. We asked Canadians how strongly they agreed with statements like “Ongoing global events often leave me feeling unsure” or “Frequent economic changes cause me to feel financially insecure.”
The results are sobering:
68% of Canadians worry they won’t be able to afford basic needs in the next six months.
70% say they are delaying major life decisions due to financial or economic uncertainty.
Nearly half of Canadians say they would struggle to meet expenses for three months if their financial situation suddenly changed.
We used these responses to group Canadians into five categories of precarity. The largest cohort—about 38%—falls into the “moderate” category: people who feel regular anxiety about their future but haven’t given up hope. 30% fall into “high precarity,” and 9% into “extreme.” These are the people for whom anxiety is shaping daily decisions, from what to buy to whom to trust.
Crucially, precarity cuts across demographics. Yes, younger Canadians are more likely to feel extreme precarity, but many high-income earners and older Canadians report similar anxieties—especially about healthcare, retirement, or the global economy. Women are more likely to score high on the index than men, and those with children are among the most concerned about what the future holds.
If scarcity is about not having enough, precarity is about not knowing whether anything will hold.
How Precarity Changes Consumer Behaviour
What happens when someone doesn’t just feel strapped for cash but feels like the whole system might break?
First, they become more cautious—not just financially, but emotionally. They stick with what they know. That’s why brand loyalty is rising, even in an era of disruption. People aren’t experimenting. They’re seeking comfort, familiarity, and assurance.
Second, people look for meaning. They want their choices to reflect their values. 86% of Canadians say they feel a sense of pride when buying Canadian-made products. More than half say they’d pay more for a product if it supports Canadian jobs or strengthens the country. In a precarious world, every dollar becomes a vote—not just for value, but for values.
Third, consumers start questioning everything. Trust in advertising is fragile. People doubt motives. They scrutinize claims. They fact-check your slogans. And they talk to each other more than they listen to you.
This is why we’re seeing a return to fundamentals: word-of-mouth, community endorsement, peer reviews. Influencer marketing still matters, but only when the influencer feels authentic, not scripted. Traditional advertising? Still effective—but only when it meets people where they are emotionally.
This leads us to a major insight: In a precarity mindset, the tone of your message matters more than ever.
Fear, Trust, and Storytelling
People navigating precarity aren’t just cautious, they’re conflicted. Every purchase now carries weight: Can I afford this? Do I trust this? Does this reflect who I am? It’s not just about frugality. It’s about fear. Fear of instability, of losing control, of making the wrong choice in an uncertain world.
That’s why facts aren’t enough anymore. People aren’t looking for perfect logic, they’re looking for emotional clarity. They want to feel understood before they’re asked to commit. They want to see themselves – their fears, their hopes, their values – reflected back through the stories brands tell.
In this environment, storytelling becomes a survival tool, not for the brand, but for the consumer. A message that says, “We see you. We understand. Here’s how we can help,” resonates far more than any promotion or product spec.
That’s why national pride is on the rise. Buying Canadian isn’t just patriotic, it’s protective. It offers stability in a world that feels out of control.
But here’s the catch: in a world shaped by precarity, storytelling must be real. Performative empathy will backfire. Consumers are more alert, more skeptical, and more willing to call out hypocrisy. If you say you care, you better show it – in your sourcing, your pricing, your policies.
The brands that win won’t just tell stories — they’ll earn the right to be part of someone else’s. Because right now, that’s what trust really means.
People living with precarity are not just frugal. They are frightened. They want someone to tell them it’s going to be okay—and show them how. This is where storytelling becomes essential.
Dry facts don’t cut it anymore. Emotional narratives do. People engage with content that reflects their fears, their struggles, and their hopes. They crave stories of resilience, community, and purpose. They want to see themselves in the content you create.
Brands that lean into this—that tell real stories, that honour people’s anxieties, and that offer more than shallow reassurance—are connecting deeply. For example, ads that open with, “We know these are uncertain times,” and then offer a tangible benefit or resource, often outperform generic brand-building campaigns. Because they feel like someone is listening.
At the same time, precarity increases the risk of backlash. Audiences are quicker to call out hypocrisy. They’re tired of platitudes. If your brand says it stands for stability but acts erratically, you’ll be punished.
The Political Parallel
We saw all of this play out in the 2025 federal election. Voters were split between those looking for immediate relief from rising costs, and those looking for long-term reassurance in an unstable world. While Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre offered a disruptive, change-driven message, Liberal Leader Mark Carney positioned himself as the steady hand. For millions of voters, the choice wasn’t left versus right. It was uncertainty versus security.
Among those with extreme precarity, our data shows that support for the Liberals surged. These voters weren’t necessarily partisan. They were anxious. And they wanted someone to tell them the systems they rely on wouldn’t collapse.
This political example matters for marketers. It shows how deeply a precarity mindset influences decision-making. It overrides ideology. It reshapes habits. It makes people vote, shop, and think differently.
Engagement in an Age of Precarity
So what should marketers, advertisers, and content creators do with all this?
Start with empathy. Your audience is more anxious than ever. Before you sell, reassure. Before you persuade, listen. Brands that show they understand what people are going through will win the trust that others lose.
Be transparent. Don’t over-promise. Don’t hide fine print. Don’t fake values. Canadians can spot spin from a mile away. In a low-trust environment, clarity and honesty are currency.
Tell better stories. Ditch the jargon. Humanize your message. Use real people, real struggles, and real hope. People don’t want to be dazzled. They want to be seen.
Focus on stability. Offer products and services that feel reliable. Highlight durability, customer support, community roots. Position your brand as a source of calm in the storm.
Connect emotionally. Whether you’re selling coffee, insurance, or a TV show, you’re in the reassurance business now. The question to ask is: How does my brand make someone feel more secure?
The Bottom Line
The shift from scarcity to precarity is not a marketing trend. It’s a psychological transformation of the Canadian public. It’s making people question their plans, change their behaviours, and scrutinize every institution they interact with—including yours.
If you’re in the business of influence, you need to understand this. You need to speak to the underlying anxieties, not just the surface-level desires. You need to help people make sense of a world that feels increasingly unstable.
Because in a world defined by precarity, the brands, leaders, and creators who offer stability, empathy, and clarity will be the ones who last.
Trust isn’t a nice-to-have anymore.
It’s the strategy.
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.
Earlier this year (and even last year) discussions have been heating up about the value of DEI policies and initiatives. Walmart, Warner Bros, Goldman Sachs and others shifted language or removed these policies altogether last year, with many more following suit. But where is this shift coming from? Is it being driven by an anti-DEI narrative among citizens, or somewhere else?
The data below is from two online surveys. The first, with n=3,000 living in Canada from February 5th to 10th 2025. The second is an online survey fielded with n=1,500 living in the United States from Janaury 23rd to 25th 2025.
DEI: The personal argument
Just under half of Canadians do not see an impact on their lives from DEI policies (positive or negative). When it comes to the impact of DEI policies on individuals, opinions are mixed. 35% say DEI policies help people like them, 45% say they have no impact, and 20% say DEI policies hurt people like them.
Those who say DEI has a positive impact on their lives tend to be the groups DEI policies are designed to help. These are:
Younger Canadians: 47% (vs the 35% average)
Women: 38%
And those who identify as a visible minority (55%, even higher for minority women)
And those who say DEI policies hurt people like them tend to be middle-aged (45-59), particularly middle-aged men, and those who do not identify as a visible minority (22%).
DEI: The societal argument
There is however more agreement that DEI policies have a net positive impact on society overall. 51% of Canadians agree with this, 25% say they have no impact, and 24% say they have a net negative impact on our society.
Some similar trends emerge here as well.
Women (56%), and those who identify as a visible minority (59%) are more likely to see a positive impact on society from DEI.
And middle-aged Canadians, particularly men, and those who do not identify as a visible minority are more likely to say there is a net negative impact on society.
DEI: The economic argument
Canadians are less certain about economic benefits but the idea that DEI has a net positive impact on the economy rather than a net negative wins out 2:1. 46% say there’s a net positive impact on the economy from DEI, 21% say net negative, and 32% say no impact at all (positive or negative).
Similar trends emerge here as well. Those who may be more likely to benefit from DEI policies (women and those who identify as a visible minority) are more inclined to see the benefits of DEI on the economy. While middle-aged Canadians (again middle-aged men driving the trend) are more inclined to see net negative impacts on the economy.
Finally, about 4 in 10 Canadians are invested in pushing for more diversity in leadership positions, 44% say it isn’t important to them either way. Only 14% say we need less diversity in leadership positions.
The divide between men and women
There has been a lot of narrative about the divide between young men and young women on the political spectrum. When it comes to DEI (for the most part) men and women aren’t on opposite ends of a spectrum. Instead women are far more active supporters than men, particularly young women, with their male counterparts being rather indifferent.
On all dimensions (personal, economic, societal) young women show a lot more support for the benefits of DEI (often 10+ points higher than their male peers). The gap between young men and women is biggest when it comes to DEI’s impact on society.
But it’s older men (those 45 to 59) that are most likely to be anti-DEI. Around 30% of this cohort of men believe DEI has a net negative impact on themselves, the economy, and society overall.
The political angle
While it is still a minority, CPC voters (those voting CPC today) are more likely to be ‘anti-DEI’ than their LPC and NDP peers. For example, 36% of CPC voters say DEI has a net negative impact on society. Another way of looking at it is they are also a lot more likely to be moderate about DEI- saying it has no noticeable impact on themselves.
NDP voters are most likely to see the benefits of DEI.
Canadians vs Americans
The views of our American counterparts are not that distant from our own when it comes to general trends but there are some notable differences. 37% of Americans say DEI policies help people like themselves (35% among Canadians). 40% say they have no impact and 23% say they hurt people like themselves. All nearly identical to the views of Canadians.
On the societal argument: 54% say DEI policies have a net positive impact on society (51% among Canadians), 15% no impact (25% among Canadians) and 32% a negative impact (up 8 points compared to Canadians).
On the economic argument: 45% of Americans say DEI policies and investment have a net positive impact on the economy, 26% say no impact and 28% say a net negative impact (7 points higher than Canada, notably).
The Upshot
If there has been a shift, it has landed on soft positive support for DEI policies. The most likely response is that DEI is good- but almost just as probable is that DEI policies have no impact (good or bad). Few have an issue with DEI policies- and those who do tend to be groups that were best positioned to have benefited from past status quo, generally.
There are 3 key findings that stand out to me:
1. Those who are set to benefit most from DEI are most supportive, but still only a minority feel the current approach to DEI is having a positive impact on them and society. Perhaps it is worth evolving our approach to DEI to ensure these policies are more successful at reaching their intended outcomes.
2. Very few Canadians see DEI initiatives as a negative- many see positive impacts of DEI, while the other prevailing view is that they don’t have much of an impact on their lives at all. The narrative that DEI efforts are harming progress and opportunities has not taken root in the mainstream in Canada.
3. DEI is not an issue that sows deep divide between younger men and women but it helps explain how the priorities and values of these two groups differ. Younger men aren’t anti-DEI but they also aren’t prioritizing it to the same extent as young women. This means there is still a clear difference in the value set between these two groups- and likely to play out in their views on other social issues too.
Methodology
The first survey was conducted with 1,500 eligible American voters from January 23 to 24, 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 +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.
The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched the US population according to age, gender, ethnicity, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
The second survey was conducted with 3,000 adult Canadians over the age of 18 from February 5 to 10, 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 +/- 1.79%, 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.
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.
Mark Carney’s Liberal government may have won the 2025 election, but the road ahead will be anything but smooth. In fact, it might be among the most complex governing challenges any federal government has faced in a generation. Carney didn’t ride a wave of optimism or party enthusiasm into office. He won because he aligned—almost perfectly—with the emotional mood of the larger proportion of the electorate.
That mood has changed. In the last few years, Canadians were driven by a scarcity mindset: “Can I afford rent and groceries?” “Will I get the healthcare I need?” But that has shifted.
For the first four months of 2025 and the election campaign, was fought under the shadow of something deeper and more destabilizing: a growing precarity mindset. And Carney’s calm, competent, and serious tone met the moment better than any of his opponents.
Team Abacus Data has been tracking this shift in public consciousness for some time. But new polling conducted just days after the April 28 election confirms it. A majority of Canadians remain deeply uncertain—not just about their finances, but about the systems, institutions, and international relationships that underpin their lives. They want reassurance, not revolution. Stability, not swagger. They want a government that doesn’t just promise change but delivers confidence in the face of global chaos.
This, then, is the new governing context. Welcome to the Age of Reassurance.
And for public affairs professionals, this moment offers both risk and opportunity.
The Public Mood: Relief, Reassurance, and a Lingering Edge of Anxiety
Our post-election survey of 1,500 Canadians finds that the appetite for relief from the cost of living crisis remains strong. When asked which Liberal campaign promises people most want the new government to act on first, the top two are about affordability: cutting income taxes for the middle class and making the federal carbon tax reduction permanent by shifting the burden to big polluters.
In fact, 50% of Canadians selected income tax cuts among their top three priorities. This was followed by cancelling the consumer carbon tax (40%) and expanding access to dental care (36%)—all reminders that even as Canadians worry about the future, they’re still struggling with the present.
That tension—between the need for short-term help and long-term stability—is the essence of the precarity mindset. Canadians aren’t just reacting to high prices; they’re doubting the durability of the systems around them. They want policies that both cushion the impact and promise resilience.
And Carney’s coalition reflects this duality.
Among Liberal voters, we see especially strong support for promises that reflect stability: the new national dental care program, investments in mental health, and most notably, policies that clarify and stabilize the Canada-U.S. relationship. When asked which promises they most hope the Liberals will carry through on, Liberal voters overwhelmingly say: make dental care real, reinforce childcare, and provide certainty on immigration and economic security.
That’s important. Because while the immediate economic relief matters, the new Liberal coalition was forged in fear—not hope. And fear, while politically mobilizing, is volatile. It doesn’t guarantee loyalty. It seeks protection. And if that protection falters, the coalition could unravel quickly.
The Real Challenge: Precarity Across the Policy Landscape
What does precarity look like in public opinion? It’s not just inflation anxiety. It’s a broader feeling that core systems are at risk of failing.
Healthcare. Housing. Climate. The economy. Canada’s place in the world. AI and technological disruption. An aging population. All of these are now wrapped in a narrative of instability and fragility.
In our survey, nearly 70% of Canadians say they are concerned about climate change’s effects in the next five years. Even more are worried about whether housing will be affordable for their children. And a majority are unsure whether Canada can withstand further economic turbulence caused by Trump-era tariffs and U.S. political instability.
This is the governing terrain for Mark Carney. It demands policy that is both imaginative and credible. It requires communication that explains, reassures, and builds public trust. And it puts pressure on government to move quickly enough to show progress, without losing the discipline needed for long-term reforms – all in the confines of a minority government.
Add to this Canada’s regional tensions—particularly between the federal government and Alberta, led by Premier Danielle Smith—and the complexity only grows. Public opinion in Alberta, like in Quebec, is more suspicious of federal institutions, less supportive of carbon pricing, and more resistant to federal authority in areas like healthcare, energy, and taxation. Managing this relationship will require not just constitutional delicacy but real political courage.
Meanwhile, Quebec remains pivotal. The Liberals’ gains there came largely because Carney’s centrism and technocratic brand resonated with risk-averse Quebecers far more focus on the impact of Trump than those in Ontario, the Prairies or British Columbia. But that support could easily be lost if Ottawa misreads Quebec’s cultural or jurisdictional sensitivities. For a government seeking national unity during uncertain times, Quebec is a linchpin, not a backstop.
What This Means for Public Affairs Professionals
So, what does this all mean for those of us in public affairs, advocacy, and government relations?
First, recognize that the emotional frame of the electorate has changed. Precarity is now the dominant public mindset—and policy proposals that don’t speak to it may fall flat. Canadians are looking for security. They want proposals that demonstrate control over chaos. So, if you’re advocating for a new program, regulation, or investment, you need to answer the implicit question: “Will this make life feel more stable?”
Second, align your narrative with reassurance. That means striking the right tone—competence over charisma, clarity over confrontation. There’s less appetite for ideological brinkmanship, and more interest in pragmatism. This Liberal government was elected to manage uncertainty, not to excite people. Frame your priorities as helpful to that project.
Third, understand the coalition you’re engaging with. The 2025 Liberal victory was not a sweeping mandate; it was a patchwork of motivated segments—older voters seeking protection, suburban families anxious about housing and childcare, younger Canadians worried about climate and job security. Each segment brought different expectations to the table. And notably, younger voters—especially Millennials and Gen Z—still feel disconnected from the Liberals. Many abandoned the party for the Conservatives this time, not because they were aligned ideologically, but because they didn’t feel seen.
Re-engaging those voters will be part of the government’s longer-term challenge. And proposals that show ambition for the future—particularly around climate, tech, and affordability—will be essential to building credibility with them.
Fourth, embrace public opinion research. In a fragmented political environment, with a volatile electorate, assumptions are dangerous. We can no longer treat “the public” as a single audience. The precarity mindset affects people differently—by age, gender, region, and income. Understanding these distinctions, and tracking how public expectations evolve, is crucial for effective advocacy.
This is especially important in the early days of the Carney government. Public affairs professionals have a window to help shape the agenda. But doing so effectively will require not just relationships in government, but insight into what the public is demanding from that government.
The Policy Window is Open—But Not for Long
New governments are often defined by what they accomplish early. And our data is clear: Canadians want action now.
Income tax cuts. Dental care. Housing construction. Stabilizing the relationship with the United States. These are not just abstract policy areas—they are the cornerstones of public reassurance. They’re proof points that the government understands the stakes and is prepared to act.
But they also represent a narrowing window. If Canadians don’t see evidence of progress—if the anxiety doesn’t start to ease—the public mood could sour quickly. And in a country where the trust reservoir is already shallow, disappointment is a powerful political force.
Public affairs strategies that help government move faster, communicate better, and solve real problems will be most welcome in this environment. But proposals that feel tangential, overly complex, or disconnected from people’s lived experience? They’ll be ignored—or worse, resented.
The Age of Reassurance is a time when government and advocacy must align around the same emotional north star: lowering the temperature, strengthening the foundation, and offering a credible path forward.
In Carney’s Own Words: His Stated Priorities
The themes Carney struck in his first post-election press conference only underscore the governing philosophy that lies ahead. His agenda reflects both the public’s demand for immediate relief and the deeper need for systemic reassurance. He promised to swiftly cut income taxes for the middle class and expand the federal dental care program to cover eight million Canadians—two popular pledges that address affordability in the short term. But Carney also framed his mission in grander, more structural terms: building Canadian economic resilience, reducing reliance on external partners like the U.S., and eliminating internal trade barriers. “We can give ourselves more than the Americans can take away,” he said, vowing to pursue nation-building investments, drive productivity, and unify the economy under a stronger internal market.
In navigating his first high-stakes meeting with President Trump, Carney promised calm but firm diplomacy—prepared, pragmatic, and unhurried. And while he ruled out a formal governing pact with the NDP, his insistence on cross-partisan collaboration signals a leadership style designed to lower the temperature. In short, Carney is casting himself as a steward of national stability in unstable times—an approach that aligns squarely with what Canadians told us they want.
Final Thoughts: Advocacy in an Age of Precarity
There’s a temptation after any election to treat the result as a reset—a fresh page for bold ideas and policy ambition. But that’s not what Canadians asked for this time.
They asked for safety. For clarity. For a government that can weather the storms.
Mark Carney’s government was elected to be the grown-up in the room. To protect against disruption—not fuel it. That changes the game for everyone in the advocacy space.
It means public affairs must be more grounded, more data-driven, and more attuned to emotion. It means making the case not just on merits, but on how proposals contribute to systemic stability. It means helping government do the hard work of governing in a time when nothing feels certain.
Because in this age of precarity, the most powerful message we can send is: we’ve got this.
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 polling during the 2025 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2021, 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.
We are living through a profound shift in the Canadian psyche—one that is already transforming how people vote, shop, and decide whom to trust. The conditions that once fuelled a scarcity mindset—rising costs, housing shortages, healthcare delays—have evolved into something deeper and more destabilizing. What’s emerging is what we at Abacus Data call the precarity mindset: a broad, anxious uncertainty not only about what people have today, but whether the systems they rely on will hold tomorrow.
This mindset is now defining Canadian public life. Canadians are no longer simply worried about affording groceries—they’re unsure whether their jobs are future-proof, whether their kids will be able to build a life here, whether our institutions can withstand what’s coming next, or whether our country will even exist.
And there’s plenty to be worried about. Climate disruption has become more visceral—floods, fires, and storms that destroy homes and communities, raising insurance costs and stoking fear about what’s next. Technological disruption—from automation to AI—is transforming industries faster than public policy can adapt, leaving workers in a state of limbo. Meanwhile, healthcare access continues to fray, housing remains unaffordable, and long-term financial security feels increasingly out of reach for millions.
Then came Donald Trump. His threats to impose punitive tariffs on Canadian goods, undermine NATO, and even question Canada’s sovereignty have electrified this precarity. Suddenly, U.S.-Canada relations are not a diplomatic sidebar—they are a source of everyday stress. In our polling, nearly 80% of Canadians say Trump’s return to the global stage is making them feel anxious about their country’s future. And that anxiety is not abstract. Nearly half say they’ve avoided American products, cancelled trips, or made new purchasing choices because of rising U.S.-Canada tensions.
This is not business as usual. It’s emotional, structural, and deeply personal.
Our research shows that 70% of Canadians are delaying major life decisions because of financial and social uncertainty. 68% are worried about meeting their basic needs in the next six months. Nearly half would struggle to get by if they lost income. This mindset is not confined to any one demographic. Younger Canadians face job precarity and housing barriers. Middle-aged families feel squeezed between aging parents and children. Older Canadians worry about healthcare access and the future of their pensions. Across the board, Canadians are recalibrating how they make choices—political, personal, and economic.
That brings us to the 2025 federal election. Voters faced a stark choice between stability and disruption—between Mark Carney, who campaigned on competence and steady leadership, and Pierre Poilievre, who promised to tear down and rebuild. While the vote was close, what mattered most to many voters wasn’t ideology—it was who they believed could steady the country during an era of mounting risk. Leadership, in this context, was not judged by rhetoric or flair. It was judged by character—the ability to offer calm, coherent, and credible direction when the path ahead is uncertain.
This is the new standard. Canadians aren’t looking to be dazzled. They want someone who gets it, who listens, and who responds. It’s why Justin Trudeau could not connect for much of the last two years. In this precarious moment, character matters more than charisma. Consistency beats confidence. Integrity beats intensity. Reassurance beats showmanship.
For political and business leaders alike, this means the rules have changed. Canadians want leaders who earn trust, not attention. Those who show up with empathy, take responsibility, and commit to building resilience—these are the people and institutions that will thrive in the years ahead.
Because when everything feels unstable, character becomes the most valuable form of leadership we have.
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.
Abacus Data and CIVIX, a registered charity dedicated to strengthening democracy through civics and citizenship education for school-aged youth, have had a long-standing partnership working together on CIVIX’s cornerstone programs to track, understand, and amplify student civic engagement.
For the 2025 federal election we are partnering with CIVIX to share the results of the Student Vote Canada program.
Student Vote uses the election as a teachable moment. After learning about democracy and electoral process, researching the parties and platforms, and discussing the issues with their peers and families, students cast ballots for the official candidates running in their school’s electoral district.
Student Vote is a program of CIVIX. Student Vote Canada is presented in collaboration with Elections Canada.
This current tally includes results from 5,900 schools and 900,793 (870,340 valid votes and 30,453 rejected votes). Here’s how students cast their ballots.
—
This year’s Student Vote Canada results shifted significantly from 2021, with a surge in support for the Conservatives, who (based on seat count) went from third place in 2021 to first place in 2025. The Liberals also experienced a jump in seats from 2021.
Much of this vote share is due to a sharp drop in support for the NDP between 2021 and 2025, a similar trend seen among the youngest cohort in our general population surveys.
In 2025 students across Canada elected a Conservative Party minority government with the Liberal Party as the official opposition.
In Student Vote Canada 2025:
The Conservative Party was elected in 165 ridings (48.10% of the seats) and held 36.44% of the popular vote.
The Liberal Party was elected in 145 ridings (42.27% of the seats) and held 31.72% of the popular vote.
The Bloc Québécois were elected in 18 ridings (5.25% of the seats) and held 2.08% of the popular vote.
The New Democratic Party was elected in 13 ridings (3.79% of the seats) and held 14.54% of the popular vote.
The Green Party was elected in 2 ridings (0.58% of the seats) and held 7.45% of the popular vote.
How does this compare to General Election Results?
Students would have elected a different government than Canadians over 18. With the popular vote, students were far more supportive of the NDP and Green Party, leaving less support for the Conservatives and Liberals. Still, the majority of the vote was captured by these two parties for both students and Canadians over 18.
How does this compare to the Student Vote Canada results in 2021?
In 2021 students across Canada elected a Liberal minority government with the NDP as the official opposition.
2025 saw a significant shift among students towards the Conservative Party, who nearly doubled their seat count, and a sharp decline in NDP support, which dropped from 108 seats in 2021 to just 13 in 2025.
In 2021…
The Liberal Party was elected in 118 ridings (34.9% of the seats), and held 24.1% of the popular vote. In 2025 the Liberals won 27 more seats and their popular vote share grew around 8 points.
The New Democratic Party was elected in 108 ridings (32% of the seats) and held 28.5% of the popular vote. In 2025 the New Democratic Party won 95 fewer seats and their popular vote share dropped nearly 14 points.
The Conservative Party was elected in 88 ridings (26% of the seats) and held 25.1% of the popular vote. In 2025 the Conservatives won 77 more seats and their popular vote share grew over 11 points.
The Bloc Québécois were elected in 21 ridings (6.2% of the seats) and held 2.1% of the popular vote. In 2025 the Bloc Québécois won 3 fewer seats and their popular vote remained stable.
The Green Party was elected in 3 ridings (0.9% of the seats) and held 9.8% of the popular vote. In 2025 the Green Party won 1 fewer seat and their popular vote share dropped just over two points.
What was Shaping the Student Mindset?
Between December 2024 and March 2025 students from across Canada participated in the Student Budget Consultation program and responded to this survey to indicate their priorities and preferences for focus in the federal landscape.
Youth in Canada wanted the government focus on the cost of living, housing and healthcare. They say these are also the most important steps the federal government could take to support young Canadians. The top federal priorities that would best support Canadian youth look similar to those we see elsewhere: decreasing the cost of living and everyday essentials, increasing housing affordability and improving access to mental health supports.
Though not a main focus when the survey launched, the relationship between Canada and the United States emerged as a key issues for students who participated in March/April.
The full results of Student Vote Canada 2025 can be viewed here.
THE UPSHOT
A strong shift from the NDP to the Conservatives is not unlike the shift we saw among the youngest cohort of Canada’s voting age population during the last couple of weeks. For younger Canadians cost-of-living continues to dominate top concerns and likely shaped voting behavior for young Canadians, including students.
We will be learning more about what exactly motivated students to cast their ballots and what was driving their vote- with more shared in the coming weeks as part of our post-election coverage.
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.
Tomorrow is Election Day in Canada. Months ago, the outcome looked fairly certain – a Conservative victory. But today, as we release our final poll of the campaign, it looks like the Liberals are now the favourites to pull off a fourth straight victory under the leadership of Mark Carney.
After 40 turbulent days, Canada’s 45th general election comes down to one simple question: will voters choose the reassurance of Mark Carney’s steady-as-she-goes Liberal reset, or the Pierre Poilievre promises after a decade of Liberal rule? What began in January as a lock for the Conservatives was upended by Justin Trudeau’s resignation, Carney’s lightning-fast coronation, and Donald Trump’s return to the White House with threats of annexation and trade war. Suddenly “change vs. continuity” became “stability vs. disruption,” and the ballot box psychology flipped from scarcity-driven anger to precarity-tinged caution.
Since February our team has interviewed more than 15,000 Canadians, probing not just vote intent but the emotions beneath it. We built a Precarity Index, ran nightly regressions, flash-polled the debates, and mapped how trust, competence, and fear intersect. Each wave has pointed to the same tension: a majority still longs for change, yet a plurality doubts that the riskier option will deliver it.
Today we release our final poll—2,500 interviews conducted April 24-27, the largest sample of the campaign—using the likely-voter model that nailed Nova Scotia in 2024 and Ontario just a few months ago. It offers the clearest picture yet of where Canada stands on the eve of decision day, and why.
The Context
Canadians approach tomorrow’s vote with a pervasive sense of unease. Only 31 per cent say the country is headed in the right direction, while 51 per cent believe we’re on the wrong track; sentiment about the wider world is even darker (14 per cent right direction, 73 per cent wrong).
Over the campaign, however, both main parties have sustained unusually wide paths to victory. The Liberal accessible universe has climbed from the mid-40s in January to 53 per cent today (although lower than its peak mid-campaign at 57%, edging out the Conservatives at 50 per cent, after the Tory pool slid back a few points from its early-January high of roughly 55 per cent.
The Issues
Pocket-book pain still rules the ballot box. Nearly half of Canadians (45%) rank “reducing your cost of living” among their two decisive issues, up three points in a fortnight. “Dealing with Donald Trump and the impact of his decisions” follows at 30 per cent, while housing (20%), economic growth (19%) and healthcare (18%) round out the top tier.
But the mix shifts sharply by generation: cost of living dominates for every age group, yet Trump anxiety rises from just 18 per cent among 18- to 29-year-olds to 45 per cent among voters 60-plus, while concern about housing falls from 36 percent in Gen Z to 11 per cent in Boomers.
On issue ownership, Mark Carney’s Liberals retain a double-digit edge where geopolitics meet security—Trump (+11), representing Canada abroad (+10), supporting Ukraine (+12). Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives win the pocket-book fight: cost of living (+10), housing (+9), deficit control (+2) and “making Canada a better place to live” (+3).
Health-care stewardship and public-service protection are essentially dead heats with the NDP performing best on those – and explaining Jagmeet Singh’s desire to focus the election on healthcare. All this underscores why tomorrow’s verdict will hinge on which frame—global risk or household squeeze—voters feel most acutely in the voting booth.
The Ballot Questions
I’ve argued throughout this campaign that this has been one election with two ballot questions: dealing with Trump and his policies and change.
A month ago the ballot was a referendum on Donald Trump; it’s pretty near an even split between Trump and change.
At the end of March, 54 % of Canadians said managing Trump would steer their vote, versus 46 % who cared more about a change in direction. Four weekly waves later the lines crossed decisively: 56 % now centre their choice on change, just 44 % on Trump. As the campaign ends, 53% say the vote is more about change compared with 47% who say it’s more about Trump.
Region and generation shape that split. Prairie and Alberta voters are the most change-hungry (63% in Alberta, 58% in SK/MB), while Quebec remains the lone region where a slim majority (57%) still prioritises Trump.
Younger Canadians tilt heavily to change (57% among 18-29s), but Boomers lean towards Trump (56%). Partisanship locks in the frame: 75% of Conservative supporters view the election through a change lens, whereas 68% of Liberals see it through a Trump lens.
The consequence is stark: Trump-focused voters break Liberal 58-21, while change-focused voters lean Conservative 55-23—explaining both the tightening race and why neither side can yet claim victory.
The Party Leaders
Mark Carney closes the campaign as the only major leader with a net-positive brand: 46 per cent hold a favourable view of him versus 33 per cent unfavourable—a +12 margin that has climbed steadily from +5 in mid-March. The arc matters. Carney started the year an unknown quantity (19% positive) but has converted the introduction into trust, especially among older voters and swing Liberals.
Pierre Poilievre’s numbers look softer on paper (41% positive, 44 % negative, net –3) yet they, too, reflect progress and resilience. Six weeks ago his negatives out-paced his positives by almost double digits; today the gap has narrowed to single digits and, crucially, he matches Carney on intensity—Conservative supporters like him as strongly as Liberal supporters like Carney.
Jagmeet Singh ends in familiar territory (31% positive, 40% negative), a flat line that underscores why the NDP vote never broke out.
Stacked beside Donald Trump, the contrast is stark. Only 11 per cent of Canadians view the U.S. President favourably, while 77 per cent hold an unfavourable opinion—net –66. Trump remains the great unifier … in the negative sense. His toxicity provides the backdrop for Carney’s “steady hand” narrative and complicates Poilievre’s ability to fully close the deal with centrists.
Asked directly who they would prefer as Prime Minister, 40 per cent choose Carney, 37 per cent Poilievre, and 10 per cent Singh. This is the closest measure on preferred PM that we’ve measured since March.
The attributes we’ve tracked explain the gap: Carney leads Poilievre by 5–12 points on finding common ground, standing up to a bully, and captaining a ship through a rough storm. Poilievre edges ahead only on the more literal, hands-on tasks of putting out a kitchen fire and putting up a shelf. In short, Canadians see Carney as the problem-solver in choppy seas, while Poilievre is viewed as the change agent better with a hammer—an image that helps but hasn’t yet proven decisive.
Expectations on the Outcome
Voters see tomorrow tilting red, but not by a landslide. Today, nearly half (48 per cent) predict a Liberal victory, versus 34 per cent who bet on the Conservatives and just 4 per cent on the NDP; 15 per cent remain unsure.
A month-long swing underlies that headline. In mid-February, fully 52 per cent thought Poilievre would win and only 20 per cent named the Liberals. Confidence flipped through March as Carney’s brand firmed up and the race tightened.
Asked another way, 33 per cent expect a “close Liberal win,” 14 per cent foresee a Liberal romp, while just 27 per cent see any flavour of Conservative win with 15% thinking calling it too close to call.
What is the Central Argument of the Political Parties?
Asked to pinpoint each party’s “central argument,” voters see a far clearer through-line on the Liberal side. Fully 37% say the Liberals’ pitch is that they’re “the only party that can stand up to Donald Trump and protect Canada.” That message is backed by a smaller but coherent second tier—“restore stability and competence” (13%) and “take Canada in a bild new direction” (13%). 41% of Liberal voters say the core message of the campaign for the Liberals has been standing up to Trump. 15% says its about restoring stability.
By contrast, Conservatives present a more diffuse narrative. Their leading theme—“take Canada in a bold new direction”—registers with just 21% of voters, followed closely by “be change to Canada and restore the country’s promise (17%), “clean up corruption/fix a broken system” (16%), and “serious plan to make life more affordable” (15%). Conservative supporters also split on what the core message is from affordability (23%) to restoring the country’s promise (19%) to fixing a broken system (14%).
The Vote
Our final likely-voter model—including only Canadians who say they have already voted in an advance poll or are almost certain to cast a ballot tomorrow—puts the Liberals at 41%, the Conservatives at 39%, the NDP at 10%, the Bloc Québécois at 6%, the People’s Party at 3 %, and the Greens at 1%. Compared with our April 21 wave, the Liberal share has slipped a point while the Conservatives have gained two, leaving the minor parties unchanged.
The trajectory chart tells the story: since mid-March, support for the two front-runners has oscillated within a five-point band, with the lead trading hands twice. Carney’s Liberals peaked at 44% during the April 10-25 window and have drifted back three points. Poilievre’s Conservatives bottomed out at 37% a week ago and have clawed two points back to 39%. The NDP recovered from an early-April swoon (8%) to finish at its campaign average of 10%. In effect, late movers nudged the race from a potential Liberal majority to what now looks like a fight between the two.
Regional battlegrounds
Ontario remains the Liberal firewall but things have tightened there: 45% LPC, 42% CPC, 7% NDP
British Columbia is the mirror image: 40% CPC, 38% LPC, 17% NDP—margin-of-error stuff with some three-way seat splits likely.
Quebec shows the Bloc parked at 29%, ten points behind the Liberals at 39%, and Conservatives stuck at 20%.
Atlantic Canada delivers the Liberals their widest margin (56% vs. 37%).
The Prairies do the same for Conservatives: Alberta 58% CPC, Saskatchewan–Manitoba 47% CPC, though Liberals post competitive 19% and 39% respectively, enough to hold and maybe gain some urban seats.
Demographic cross-currents
Age tells two stories. Voters 18-29 break Liberal 46% to 32% (there is a big difference between likely and all eligible voters by age), 30-44 voters split almost evenly (40% CPC, 38% LPC). Middle-aged Canadians 45-59 give the Conservatives their best age margin (42% vs. 33% LPC), but the 60+ cohort swings back convincingly to the Liberals (46% vs. 38%) —critical, given Baby Boomers’ superior turnout.
A persistent gender gap underpins the topline: men prefer Conservatives 43-38, while women prefer Liberals 43-35. Education pulls the parties in opposite directions: Conservatives lead by ten among high-school-only voters (43-33) but trail by twelve among university graduates (35-47).
Where the 2021 coalitions have leaked
Vote retention analysis captures the churn. Eighty-five percent of 2021 Conservatives remain loyal, but 13% have crossed to the Liberals. Liberals hold 79% of their 2021 base and import fully 41% of past NDP voters—an orange-to-red flow that offsets modest erosion to the Conservatives (11%). Only 47 % of 2021 NDP voters stick with Singh.
Why the two-point gap feels bigger on the map
Because Conservative gains are front-loaded in Alberta and the rural Prairies, each additional popular-vote point buys fewer new seats. Liberal support, by contrast, is cost-effective in suburban Ontario, francophone Quebec, and vote-efficient Atlantic ridings.
What could still move
If voter turnout turns out to be higher than we expect (around 70%), then that could help the Conservatives but only be a small margin. Turnout estimates by age, according to our data, are:
18 to 29: 43% 30 to 44: 64% 45 to 59: 75% 60+: 85%
Among those who haven’t voted in an advance poll or are unlikely to vote tomorrow, the vote intention would be: Conservative 39%, Liberal 37%, NDP 11, BQ 5%, GPC 4%.
The Upshot
Barring a late-night plot twist, the numbers point to a fourth Liberal mandate. Their two-point popular-vote edge, coupled with vote-efficient leads in Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada, puts a Carney government squarely in the driver’s seat—and a majority is a live possibility. Still, the race has tightened just enough in the closing week that a minority can’t be ruled out. If a handful of 905, Lower Mainland, or suburban Winnipeg ridings wobble, 170 seats suddenly looks a taller climb.
What could shift it? Turnout. Our model assumes participation in the high-60s to low-70s. If we’re low—say it pushes well north of 70%—that means more late deciders and infrequent voters, a pool that leans Conservative 39-37. In other words, an unexpected surge of younger and less certain voters would give Poilievre his best (and perhaps only) path to plurality territory.
So watch two things Monday night: advance-vote ridings the Liberals need to hold, and raw turnout levels. If participation tracks 2021 levels, expect a red map and a re-elected Prime Minister Carney before midnight. If the lines outside polling stations are longer than usual—especially in B.C. and the GTAs—this cliff-hanger could run even later than the broadcasters planned.
Tune into CBC tomorrow. I’ll be joining Front Burner podcast host Jayme Poisson and friends to dig into the elections biggest moments, watch the results, and have some fun. Bookmark this link.
Methodology
The survey was conducted with 2,500 adult Canadians over the age of 18 from April 24 to 27, 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 +/- 2.0%, 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.
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.
Over the course of this election campaign, our team at Abacus Data has spoken to more than 13,000 Canadians. And we’ve asked them more than just “who are you voting for?”
We’ve explored what they’re feeling. What they’re afraid of. What they want from their leaders. And why—despite all the noise—so many remain undecided, hesitant, or conflicted.
Our approach this campaign has been different. Instead of just tracking vote intention, we’ve been trying to decode what’s driving it. And it’s revealed something deeper: a nation split not just by ideology, but by emotional mindset. A contest not just between parties, but between worldviews—scarcity vs. precarity, disruption vs. stability.
Here’s the story of the work we’ve done—and the people behind it.
Emotional Drivers: From Scarcity to Precarity
At the end of March, we launched our Precarity Index—a tool to measure how anxious, uncertain, and vulnerable people are feeling. We found that nearly 40% of Canadians fall into “high” or “extreme” precarity, where day-to-day decisions are shaped by fears of system collapse—whether it’s housing, healthcare, or economic disruption.
That mindset has defined much of this campaign.
Those feeling most precarious are more likely to support Mark Carney and the Liberals—not because they’re thrilled with the past, but because they crave calm in the face of chaos. Poilievre appeals to those who feel secure enough to demand change. But for the anxious, Carney’s brand—credible, cautious, globally connected—has real power.
This emotional divide—so central to the 2025 campaign—was something we identified early. And it’s shaped everything since.
Models, Mindsets, and Message
To go deeper, we used binary logistic regression models to pinpoint what really predicts vote intention—beyond party ID or demographics.
In fact, our models showed that even if someone thinks Poilievre is best on affordability, they may not vote Conservative unless they believe he understands them personally or that change is urgent. And with the Liberal vote, Carney’s personal brand—calm, competent, different from Trudeau—matters more than any policy promise.
We published detailed simulations to show how different combinations of perceptions affect vote probabilities. That work helped illustrate what many feel but can’t articulate: elections are won through emotional resonance, not just rational calculation.
Voter Subgroups: Gen Z, Women, and the Precarious Middle
Oksana led deep dives into gender and generational trends. She showed how Gen Z still sees this as a cost-of-living election, but turnout concerns threaten their influence. Meanwhile, women are drifting Liberal not just because of policy, but because many see Poilievre as less relatable and less compassionate.
We also identified a middle group of voters—those not highly partisan but deeply anxious—who are persuadable, watching closely, and waiting for reassurance. They could decide this election.
After the leaders’ debates, we ran flash polls within 90 minutes to gauge real-time reaction—something only our team could execute at scale. The results? A draw on performance, with Carney holding a slight edge on favourables, but Poilievre matching him on persuasion. Another signal of a tight, emotionally complex race.
Housing, Trump, and the Politics of Precarity
Eddie also led work connecting U.S. trade tensions to rising housing insecurity—especially for younger, renting Canadians. The idea that Trump tariffs could make you lose your home may sound dramatic. But for many, that’s the emotional logic at play. Global threats are being filtered through local vulnerabilities.
The Upshot
This election has been portrayed as a binary choice: change vs. continuity, Poilievre vs. Carney. But what we’ve found is more layered.
It’s a contest between emotional mindsets—between those who want control and those who want reassurance. It’s a debate about what kind of leadership Canadians want in a moment of uncertainty. And it’s being fought not just in vote intentions, but in trust, likability, and the need to feel heard.
We’ve tried to bring that complexity to life—with data, models, empathy, and speed. From real-time debate reactions to deep dives on housing, gender, and emotional drivers, our team—Eddie, Oksana, and myself—has worked to move public opinion analysis beyond the horserace.
More than 13,000 Canadians have shared their views with us. Our job has been to listen, translate, and tell their story.
Because in the end, that’s what public opinion research is all about: understanding what people feel, and how that translates into how they will vote..
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.
