UPDATED at 12:15pm ET

Our latest nationwide study of public opinion included questions about the rights of Muslim women to wear the hijab or the niqab. To assist respondents in considering this topic, we showed them pictures of both garments, and asked separate questions about each.

Highlights

• 51% “feel uncomfortable around women wearing” a niqab — 22% in the case of a hijab.

• Over half (56%) “prefer if women in Canada did not wear the niqab in public places”; 33% feel that way about the hijab.

• Still, in answer to another question, more than half (55%) found themselves agreeing that “it should be a matter of personal choice in Canada if a woman wishes to wear” a niqab; 73% say that about a hijab. The only subgroup where the majority feels otherwise about the Niqab is among Bloc Quebecois voters.

• Even more – 64% – agreed, “regardless of whether I like the niqab, it’s not really my place to say what others should or shouldn’t wear”. 77% said the same about the hijab.

• 38% believe “all women who wear a niqab do so because they are forced to by men”, and 28% feel that way about the hijab. The majority feel that some women who wear a hijab (71%) or niqab (58%) “do so as a matter of their own personal choice”.

• 62% agree that they “the Muslim faith is in some ways ‘anti-women“. However the same proportion (61%) agreed “I think many religions could be described as somewhat ‘anti women“

• 60% feel “political leaders should generally avoid making comment on religious customs” but 64% agree that “it’s appropriate to have rules for what people wear in citizenship ceremonies”.

Citizenship Ceremony

The recent debate about whether women should be obliged to bare their faces during the citizenship ceremony was also part of our probing. We offered two propositions:

“Women should be obliged to have uncovered faces when they are taking the oath of citizenship”

“It should be a matter of personal choice if a woman wants to wear a Niqab as long as she removes it for identification purposes before the ceremony”

Given these alternatives, 61% believe that faces should be uncovered, and 39% see this as a matter of personal choice. Fully 80% in Quebec, 81% of BQ voters, and 87% of Conservative voters do not believe this should be a personal choice.

There is also a clear generational divide, with the majority of those under 30 believing it should be a matter of choice and the majority of those over that age feeling it should not.

59% say the federal government is right to “challenge the recent court ruling and do what it can to ensure that women do not wear these garments during citizenship ceremonies” while 41% say Ottawa should let the ruling stand and focus on other issues”. Again, a striking generational divide is evident. Liberal voters are evenly split, as is opinion in Ontario, while Quebecers are more supportive about the challenge.

Note: “After the fact, we realized that our question contained an inaccurate reference to the Court’s ruling: our wording mentioned the Charter of Rights, rather than the Citizenship Act.  We would note that a question earlier in the same poll, which did not mention the Charter, found a similar, slightly larger majority agreeing with the proposition that it is appropriate to have rules for what people wear in citizenship ceremonies or when voting. The conclusion to be drawn is that a majority side with the PM when it comes to faces being covered during a citizenship ceremony.”

When asked whether the motive of the PM has more to do with seeking votes or a true belief on the issue, opinion is split, with 53% saying the PM “truly believes this is an important issue and a bad ruling by the court” and 47% saying “he thinks it will be popular with those who may be inclined to vote for his party”.

The Upshot

According to Bruce Anderson:

The results show that this issue is complex and reveal that many Canadians feel somewhat conflicted: on the one hand feeling discomfort with the Niqab but at the same time reluctant to have their views imposed on other people.

The Niqab is clearly seen in a different light than the Hijab, results are often 20 points or more different based on the type of garment being probed.

These issues tend to divide groups of Canadians. Rural, older, Conservative, Quebec and in particular BQ voters are more anxious about the niqab whereas younger, urban Canadians are more persuaded that these are personal choices.

Most resist the generalization that these garments reflect an anti-women culture, and believe that other religions have customs that could be characterized this way as well.

The government finds majority support for its position on wearing of the Niqab during citizenship ceremonies, and for challenging the court ruling. Clearly though, other responses indicate that the public has mixed feelings about how far politicians should go in constraining personal choice.

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 1,000 Canadians aged 18 and over from March 20 to 22, 2015. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of Canadians, recruited and managed by Research Now, one of the world’s leading provider of online research samples.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 3.1%, 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 offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, PhD.

In case you missed it, here are some of our recent releases:

Canada’s mission against ISIL: What comes next?

Conservatives and Liberals locked in dead heat. Eve Adams defection reactions mixed. 

Party Leaders are People Too

Economic anxiety on the rise; Canadians want pragmatic policy making

Should carbon be priced?  Should public opinion decide pipelines?

[Updated at 11:41am ET]

Our latest nationwide polling asked respondents to consider a series of choices of words or thoughts and asked which they most associated with three main party leaders. Our findings:

For Thomas Mulcair

His strongest attributes were: good guy, serious and competent. More than 70% associated these thoughts with the NDP leader.  60% or more also associated Mr. Mulcair with: successful, good ideas, brilliant (the other choice was “lacking intelligence”), trustworthy, even-tempered, future, experienced, thinks of others, reasonable (not “radical”) and new ideas.    Areas of relative weakness (40% or more associated these with Mr. Mulcair):  old ideas, tired, old fashioned.

For Stephen Harper

His strongest attributes were: experienced and serious. More than 70% associated these thoughts with the Conservative leader. 60% or more also associated Mr. Harper with: competent, even-tempered, good guy, successful, brilliant, and reasonable.  Areas of relative weakness (40% or more):  self-centered, tired, past (not future), not trustworthy, old fashioned, old ideas, bad ideas, and radical.

For Justin Trudeau

Mr. Trudeau’s strongest attributes were: young at heart, good guy, modern, new ideas, future, even tempered. More than 70% associated these with the Liberal leader.  More than 60% also associated Mr. Trudeau with: successful, brilliant, competent, good ideas, trustworthy.   Areas of relative weakness (40% or more associated these with Mr. Trudeau) are:  unproven, radical, and self-centered.   People were evenly divided on whether Mr. Trudeau was more serious, or more fun.

Another way to examine these numbers is to look at which leader is most closely associated with the attributes. Here is a selection:

Experienced Harper 74% Mulcair 64% Trudeau 40%
Modern Trudeau 79% Mulcair 58% Harper 50%
Future Trudeau 76% Mulcair 65% Harper 52%
New Ideas Trudeau 74% Mulcair 60% Harper 49%
Even tempered Trudeau 71% Mulcair 67% Harper 64%
Good guy Mulcair 78% Trudeau 78% Harper 62%
Competent Mulcair 74% Trudeau 64% Harper 64%
Thinks of others Mulcair 63% Trudeau 54% Harper 44%
Good ideas Mulcair 69% Trudeau 64% Harper 55%.
Trustworthy Mulcair 68% Trudeau 61% Harper 52%

The Upshot?

Clearly, many people see positive attributes in each of the party leaders. The Prime Minister is seen serious, experienced and competent. He’s more likely seen as a good guy than a bad person, but his ideas are seen by some as more dated and controversial.  He scores weakest on “thinking of others”.  On questions of competence and brainpower, the PM is competitive, but does not lead the others.

Mr. Mulcair is generally quite well regarded by voters. His biggest advantage over the others are being seen as a good guy, competent and empathetic.  His challenges are largely vis a vis Mr. Trudeau, compared to who he is seen as less contemporary.  Despite the “angry Tom” critique sometimes heard, Canadians generally see him as even-tempered. He is not seen as particularly radical.

Mr. Trudeau is seen as someone who can bring a fresh, modern perspective to political leadership.  He is seen as a likeable individual. He is seen as lacking in experience, but competitive when it comes to competence and brainpower.  His biggest risk factors are that one in two wonder if his ideas may be radical, and the feeling that he has less experience than his competitors.

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 1,460 Canadians aged 18 and over from February 12 to February 16, 2015. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of Canadians, recruited and managed by Research Now, one of the world’s leading provider of online research samples.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. 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 offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value added insight.  Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, PhD. For more information, visit our website at http://www.abacusdata.ca/

In our latest nationwide poll, we asked some questions about Canada’s mission against ISIS/ISIL. Here are the results:

When informed that the Government of Canada must soon decide whether to continue or end our participation in the mission, 43% felt that Canada should continue, while 38% said that Canada should withdraw when the period of time we committed to is over. Another 19% said they didn’t know.

Support for continuing was higher in Alberta (53%) and Ontario (48%) and lower than average in Quebec (31%). Most men favour continuing (51%) while the plurality of women would prefer to see the mission end (40%). There is a significant generational skew to these results, with younger people favouring an end, and older voters taking the opposite position.

By a margin of 61%-27% Conservative voters would rather see the mission be extended. That is the plurality view of Liberal voters too (49%-35%). NDP voters lean in the opposite direction (48% withdraw – 34% continue).

We asked what the opposition parties should do if the government decided to extend the mission. Across the country, 48% said the Liberals should support that decision, while only 27% said the Liberals should vote against such a decision.

Among Liberal Party voters, 57% said the Liberals should support a government decision to continue. In the critical battleground of Ontario, 54% said the Liberals should vote to support a motion to continue, while 24% said the Liberals should oppose.

When asked what the NDP should do in the event of a government decision to continue, the results are highly similar: 46% said the NDP should support, and 26% oppose. Among NDP voters, there was an even split with 37% saying the NDP should vote with the government, 36% against.

Worth noting is that about one in five people who personally would rather see Canada withdraw think the opposition parties should support a decision to continue, if that is the position taken by the government. Among those who aren’t sure what Canada should do, the tendency is to want to see opposition parties support rather than oppose the government, if it decides to continue.

Canadians may hesitate to support a combat role (boots on the ground) but seem reluctant to rule it out as well. 35% say if we participate “we should have our troops be involved in any and all combat roles that are necessary” while 42% say “If we participate we should make sure our troops are not involved in on the ground combat roles” and 23% are unsure.

In Quebec (52%) and BC (42%) , more prefer to avoid combat roles, while in Ontario, the Prairies and Alberta pluralities say we should play whatever role is needed. Opinion is split in Atlantic Canada.

Views on this question are also divided by gender and generation, and political leaning. Worth noting for the Liberals is that voters who will consider only the Liberals and NDP there is a preference for avoiding combat (49%) whereas among those voters who would consider either the Liberals or the Conservatives, the opposite tendency exists.

Finally, when asked what effect they thought our participation was having on the threat of terror activities against Canada, 37% said they thought the risk was increasing, 23% reducing and 20% having no effect. Another 20% said they did not know.

Among those who think that participating in the mission is resulting in a heightened risk to Canada, 31% support taking on combat roles, while 53% prefer to see Canadian troops avoid combat roles. The oppose is true among those who think the mission is reducing the threat of terror attacks in Canada: 57% support a combat role while 33% do not.

The upshot?

Canadians reveal a degree of uncertainty about the mission, but nothing that could be described as widespread resistance to the idea of continuing. This seems to be a situation where people believe that government leadership should make the decision it feels is best, given the information at their disposal, and if that decision is to continue, then it would be best not to have this be opposed by the other parties.

On the question of combat participation, the results suggest that people might prefer to see Canada avoid such risks, but are also open to the argument that pulling our share means taking on riskier assignments too.

Willingness to go along with the mission, despite feeling that it may be increasing the risks of terrorism against Canada suggests that many Canadians have decided that this is a fight we are obliged to support, and that degrading the risk will take time.

Opposition parties may read these results as a signal that Canadians expect scrutiny and thoughtful debate about our role, but that unless they offer a persuasive argument about what alternative approach would be better, they will be expected by many voters to avoid the temptation to make this a routine exercise in partisan disagreement.

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 1,460 Canadians aged 18 and over from February 12 to February 16, 2015. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of Canadians, recruited and managed by Research Now, one of the world’s leading provider of online research samples.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. 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 offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, PhD. For more information, visit our website at http://www.abacusdata.ca/

In case you missed it, here are some of our recent releases:

Conservatives and Liberals locked in dead heat. Eve Adams defection reactions mixed. 

Party Leaders are People Too

Economic anxiety on the rise; Canadians want pragmatic policy making

Should carbon be priced?  Should public opinion decide pipelines?

Looks, Gender, and Ideas: Do these matter?

Political Leaders’ Choices and Voters’ Perspectives

Our latest nationwide polling explored a number of topics, which we will post over the next week. For this initial release, we look at the headline numbers as well as reactions to the high profile floor crossing of MP Eve Adams.

Our findings:

Across Canada, 35% of decided voters in our sample would vote Conservative, 34% Liberal, and 21% NDP. The Green Party polls at 4% nationwide and 9% in BC. The BQ is at 17% in Quebec. This is largely unchanged from our previous poll in January which had the Conservatives at 33% and the Liberals at 32% and the NDP at 24%.

Based on the sample size (1,460) there is a 65% chance that the Conservatives are leading the Liberals. Based on the confidence interval, the Conservatives could be leading by as much as six points while the Liberals could be leading by as much as four points.

In the three most critical provincial races, results continue to show tight competition involving the three national parties. In BC, we see the Liberals with 35%, followed by the Conservatives at 32% and the NDP at 21%. In Ontario, the Conservatives have a lead with 42%, followed by the Liberals at 34% and the NDP at 19%. In Quebec, the Liberals are at 32%, the NDP 31% and the Conservatives have climbed to 18%.

Asked to predict the winner of the next election, 34% say the Conservatives will win, 33% the Liberals. In August of last year, the Liberals were predicted to win by 39%, the Conservatives by 25%.  A fairly steady 7% predict an NDP win.

While some indicators have improved for the Conservatives in recent months, including voting intentions, in this latest survey we also see some softening of a few indicators. The number of people who say the country is heading in the right direction has slipped from 50% in December to 43% now.

Feelings about Stephen Harper improved through the fall, and have been stable of late. As in January, our February survey shows the PM with 34% positive impressions and 40% negative.

For Thomas Mulcair, results are also not shifting noticeably. He finds 28% positive and 20% negative impressions.

As for Justin Trudeau, the latest results are slightly better than last month’s. He finds 35% positive, 30% negative opinions. Mr. Trudeau’s negatives had risen from 27% to 34% between November and January, before dropping this month.

This month, 24% say the government has governed well enough that it deserves to be re-elected, 34% say poorly enough that it deserves to be voted out of office, and 31% find themselves “in between these two points of view”. These numbers are a substantial improvement for the government over those found late last summer, when 38% said voted out, and 19% said re-elected.

The floor crossing decision of MP Eve Adams attracted considerable attention among political observers, and generated lots of commentary. Among the public, just over half 56% heard of this event.

Of those aware of the floor crossing:

28% said Ms. Adams made a bad decision, 33% said an “acceptable decision given her circumstances” and 16% said she made a good decision. Among CPC voters, 9% said “good” and 25% said “acceptable” decision. Among NDP voters, 20% said “good” and 36% said “acceptable”. Among LPC voters 25% said “good” and 44% “acceptable”.

36% said the Liberal Party was right to accept her, while 40% said the Liberals should have turned her away. Among Liberals, the majority (58%) said the party was right to accept her, 24% said the opposite. NDP voters were evenly split (38%-37%). Among Conservatives 24% said the Liberals did the right thing, while the majority said she should have been rejected. Among swing voters, the plurality view (48%-31%) was in favour of accepting Ms. Adams rather than rejecting her.

In terms of the motivation for her decision, we provided three possible scenarios: she was unwanted by the Conservatives, she was uncomfortable with Mr. Harper’s leadership, or both equally. 36% said the main reason was being unwanted by the Conservatives, 31% said both factors were equally involved, and 17% said the main driver was discomfort with the Prime Minister’s leadership.

Women as well as NDP and Liberal supporters were more likely than average to believe that discomfort with the PM was at least partly a motivating factor. Conservative voters were inclined to believe the main reason was being unwanted (56%) although a total of 29% imagined that her feeling about the PM was an equal or greater factor.

The Upshot?

According to Abacus Chairman Bruce Anderson:

For the Conservatives, these results are the latest indication of improving competitiveness, including in Quebec and Ontario. We have seen numbers swing back and forth a bit in Ontario in some of our more recent unpublished polls, which underscores the value of studying aggregations and averages over time rather than trying to provide seat projections at this time.

The Liberal Party can see mixed news in these results. While the recent softening of impressions of Mr. Trudeau has not continued this month, the consistent and substantial lead they enjoyed for many months has been replaced by a dynamic and competitive situation. They will have to beat a competitive Conservative Party if they are going to win an election this year. Overall levels of anger towards the government are modest, especially for a government that has been in office for this length of time. Roughly a third of likely voters remain to be persuaded of the case for change or against change.

The situation for the NDP remains largely unchanged. They are highly competitive in Quebec, but are having trouble gaining momentum in other parts of the country. Few see them as a likely winner of the next election, which means continued risk of strategic voting working to the advantage of the Liberals.

On the Eve Adams decision, it seems unlikely that this episode will have a major lingering effect on public opinion. While many political commentators had strong views, almost half of the public did not notice the story, and among those who did, opinions seem rather mixed. While there isn’t much evidence of enthusiasm for the outcome among Liberals, neither is there a great deal of outrage.

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 1,460 Canadians aged 18 and over from February 12 to February 16, 2015. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of Canadians, recruited and managed by Research Now, one of the world’s leading provider of online research samples.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. 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 offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, PhD. For more information, visit our website at http://www.abacusdata.ca/

In case you missed it, here are some of our recent releases:

Party Leaders are People Too

Economic anxiety on the rise; Canadians want pragmatic policy making

Should carbon be priced?  Should public opinion decide pipelines?

Looks, Gender, and Ideas: Do these matter?

Political Leaders’ Choices and Voters’ Perspectives

Our latest nationwide study of political opinion included some questions that were intended to explore what underlying perceptions Canadians have about the traits and talents of the three main party leaders. We posed a series of 16 different questions, and asked respondents to indicate which of the three leaders was most closely matched to the descriptor. Respondents received a random set of 8  scenarios.

Highlights

Stephen Harper was first choice on 5 of 16 items. The plurality picked him as the leader best suited:

• To be the CEO of a large company (47%)
• To give you advice about how to invest your money (46%)
• To give you advice about your career (41%)
• To give advice to your children about their future (37%)
• To have negotiate a contract on your behalf (38%)

Mr. Harper’s weaker associations were these:

• Most like to vacation with (24%)
• Most able to survive in the wilderness (24%)
• Most likely to stop and help if your car was stranded (22%)
• Trust to choose a good movie to watch (21%)

Thomas Mulcair was first choice on 1 of 16 items. The plurality picked him as best suited:

• To lend you $100 if you needed it (38%)

However he also finished close second on the following items, (in each case to Mr. Harper):

• To have negotiate a contract on your behalf (35%)
• To give you advice about your career (36%)
• To give advice to your children about their future (33%)

Mr. Mulcair’s weaker associations were these:

• Prefer to have babysit your kids for an evening (28%)
• Most like to have over for dinner with your family (25%)
• Most want to hear sing your favourite song (23%)
• Most like to go on vacation with (21%)

Justin Trudeau was first choice on 10 of 16 items, coming out on top on these items:

• Most like to vacation with (55%)
• Trust to choose a good movie to watch (53%)
• Most want to hear sing your favourite song (47%)
• Prefer to have babysit your kids (44%)
• Most like to have over for dinner with your family (43%)
• Most able to survive in the wilderness (42%)
• Cook the best meal (41%)
• Most like to have speak at an event in your neighborhood (41%)
• Most likely to stop and help if your car was stranded (40%)
• Trust to look after your pet (40%)

Mr. Trudeau’s weaker associations were these:

• To have negotiate a contract on your behalf (26%)
• To give you advice about how to invest your money (24%)
• To give you advice about your career (24%)
• To be the CEO of a large company (23%)

The Upshot

According to Abacus Chairman Bruce Anderson:

These numbers paint a more detailed picture of the competition among these leaders, illuminating some of their strengths and the challenges they must seek to overcome. Mr. Harper is seen as a solid choice when it comes to the some key attributes that people look for when it comes to leadership, especially financial and management skills. At the same time, he is seen as less approachable and compassionate than his rivals.

For Mr. Mulcair the result indicate that people tend to see him as compassionate and competent, themes that he has been at pains to draw out since becoming leader of the NDP. However he is also seen as somewhat less approachable than Mr. Trudeau and not on a par with Mr. Harper in terms of CEO skills and financial judgment.

For Justin Trudeau, the results underscore the popular chord he has struck, and many Canadians sense he would be able to empathize with them and be enjoyable company. These are traits many politicians aspire to, and few achieve to this level. At the same time, Mr. Trudeau finds some hesitation on the part of voters. When it comes to his ability to manage a large organization, make sound financial decisions, negotiate on behalf of others, these data suggest he is well liked, but that he has work to do to strengthen confidence that he is a better choice across the board

We intend to revisit these traits over time, including measuring the impact of advertising on the perceptions of these leaders’ strengths and weaknesses.  Detailed tables are available here (pdf)

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 1,005 Canadians aged 18 and over from January 26 to January 28, 2015. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of Canadians, recruited and managed by Research Now, one of the world’s leading provider of online research samples.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 3.1%, 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 offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, PhD. For more information, visit our website at http://www.abacusdata.ca/

In case you missed it, here are some of our recent releases:

Federal Tories and Liberals in a Dead Heat

Economic anxiety on the rise; Canadians want pragmatic policy making

Should carbon be priced?  Should public opinion decide pipelines?

Looks, Gender, and Ideas: Do these matter?

Political Leaders’ Choices and Voters’ Perspectives

For interviews, or to find out about our services, please contact Bruce Anderson at banderson@abacusdata.ca (613-882-0929) or CEO David Coletto at david@abacusdata.ca (613-232-2806)

Our latest nationwide study of political opinion looked at headline data as well as some probing about the different leaders. This release focuses on the main tracking questions, with the rest to be released in the next few days.

Voting Intention and Mood

We find a dead heat nationally with the Conservatives at 33%, the Liberals at 32% the NDP at 24%. In BC, the Conservatives have a narrow lead over the Liberals and the NDP. In Ontario, the Liberals and the Conservatives are neck and neck. In Quebec, the NDP enjoys a modest lead over the Liberals.

Not only have vote intentions tightened but so too has the expected outcome of the election. A rising number of people believe the Conservatives may win the next election, with 34% predicting a Liberal win and 33% see the Tories coming out on top. In August 2014, 39% of Canadians believed the Liberals would win compared to only 25% who thought the Conservatives would win the next election.

Along with rising anxiety about the economy, there has been a slight softening of comfort with the direction of the country, which had been rising over the preceding months. And today, 25% say the government deserves to be elected, while 36% say it deserves to be replaced, with 30% “somewhere in between”.

Leaders Impressions

In recent months we had been seeing improvement in Stephen Harper’s reputation. In the latest month’s data, that trend has paused. 34% have a positive view of the PM, while 40% are negative. For Thomas Mulcair, numbers are stable with 29% positive, and 19% negative. For Justin Trudeau, negative opinions have risen over the period from November and positive opinions have declined. He currently finds 34% positive and 31% negative.

The Upshot

According to Abacus Chairman Bruce Anderson:

The results confirm that as the country moved into an election year, the race to win the confidence of the country is tightening. The question of how Canada should participate in the fight with ISIL has been a challenging one for Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau. While his personal numbers remain better than those of the PM, his advantage has been shaved.

Mr. Harper’s competitive position improved through the last half of last year as confidence in the direction of the country rose. The latest numbers suggest that this momentum has paused, at least for the moment.

Nevertheless the overall picture continues to be largely a story of the Conservative Party looking more competitive with the Liberals. The NDP support level in Quebec remains good, but they face a continued challenge in Ontario, where they are 15 points behind the Liberals.

According to Abacus CEO David Coletto:

Over the past five months we have seen the horse race between the Liberals and Conservatives tighten even as anxiety over the economy rises and fewer Canadians feel good about the direction of the country. But more instructive has been the shift in expectations about who will win the next election. Only five months ago, the Liberals had a 13-point lead over the Conservatives. Today, the gap is all but gone.

The Conservatives have pulled even with the Liberals largely due to the party’s success at rebuilding much of the coalition that elected them in 2011. This month, 86% of those who voted Conservative in 2011 say they would vote Conservative if an election was held today. That is 6-points better than in September 2014 when the Tories trailed the Liberals by eight in our tracking. Rebuilding their majority coalition is what the next 8 months is about.

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 1,005 Canadians aged 18 and over from January 26 to January 28, 2015. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of Canadians, recruited and managed by Research Now, one of the world’s leading provider of online research samples.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 3.1%, 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 offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, PhD. For more information, visit our website at http://www.abacusdata.ca/

In case you missed it, here are some of our recent releases:

Economic anxiety on the rise; Canadians want pragmatic policy making

Should carbon be priced?  Should public opinion decide pipelines?

Looks, Gender, and Ideas: Do these matter?

Political Leaders’ Choices and Voters’ Perspectives

Conservatives and Liberals end 2014 neck and neck as Harper’s personal numbers improve

Only a few months ago, roughly two thirds (64%) of Canadians surveyed said they thought the economy was in good shape. Today, that view is held by just over one in two (54%). What’s more, the number of people who fear that things will get worse has doubled from 16% in September to 34% today.

We explored how people felt about the Finance Minister’s announcement that the federal budget would be delayed: “Given recent developments in the world economy, including the decline in the price of oil, the federal government has delayed the timing of the upcoming federal budget. Do you feel the government made the right decision to take more time or made the wrong decision?”

The plurality (43%) thought delay was the right decision, while only 24% thought it was a poor decision. Only 38% of Liberal voters, and 33% of New Democratic Party voters thought it was the wrong decision. In key battlegrounds of Quebec (20% wrong decision) Ontario (28% wrong decision) and BC (25% wrong decision) the delay met with little resistance.

On whether the budget must be balanced this year, Canadians tend not to share the Prime Minister’s insistence that this happen. Only 28% say the government should do whatever it takes to make sure the budget is balanced this year, while 51% say the government should avoid taking extra measures to ensure the budget is balanced this year, as long as Canada is close to a balanced budget. Even among Conservative Party supporters, more (52%) say close is good enough, than want to see extra measures taken (35%).

The Upshot

There are clearly rising anxieties about the economy, but so far these have affected but not transformed the mood of the public. Moreover, support for the government has tended to be increasing during this period of rising uncertainty.

The pragmatic nature of public opinion is clearly evident in these numbers. People are not preoccupied with the timing of the budget, or the exact timing of a return to surplus budgets. In choosing flexibility on budget timing, the Conservatives enjoy public support. If extensive cuts are announced to meet an arbitrary promise to balance the budget this year, Canadians may feel this is a choice made for political rather than economic reasons.

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 1,005 Canadians aged 18 and over from January 26 to January 28, 2015. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of Canadians, recruited and managed by Research Now, one of the world’s leading provider of online research samples.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 3.1%, 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 offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, PhD. For more information, visit our website at http://www.abacusdata.ca/

Download the PDF with detailed tables: PDF

In case you missed it, here are some of our recent releases:

Should carbon be priced?  Should public opinion decide pipelines?

Looks, Gender, and Ideas: Do these matter?

Political Leaders’ Choices and Voters’ Perspectives

Conservatives and Liberals end 2014 neck and neck as Harper’s personal numbers improve

In our polling just before the end of 2014, we conducted a small experimental study. We wanted to test how people react to the physical image of a prospective political candidate and also explore whether and how gender stereotyping affects political choice.

There are clear limitations to this work, which should be acknowledged readily. First, how voters vote has a lot to do with leaders, campaigns, issues, not only local candidates. Also, local candidates are known to some local voters; our hypothetical candidates were not. Third, how people choose to answer a question in a survey is not a perfect surrogate for what they would do in an actual voting situation. We see this data as simply identifying some interesting tendencies, describing some of the background thoughts that might affect how voters make the choices they do. We welcome discussion.

Jane and Perry

We prevailed upon two people we know who share an interest in politics to allow their pictures to be used in this research experiment. Jane and Perry are of a similar age. The pictures used for the bulk of the study are below.

Willing to Consider Jane and Perry?

We began by asking whether voters would consider voting for each of them if they were running in their constituency in the next federal election. The vast majority would consider either of the two (91% for Jane and 88% for Perry).

There were few regional variations but both found more hesitant voters in Quebec, where 21% were reluctant to consider Jane and 24% were reluctant to consider Perry. Large majorities of Conservatives, Liberals and New Democrats would consider either candidate.

Among those 60 or older, 89% would consider Perry, and 91% would consider Jane, indicating no generational bias. However results did vary somewhat by gender: while women were equally likely to consider each (88% and 90%), men were more likely to consider Jane (96%) than Perry (88%)

Initial Preference between Jane and Perry?

We then asked, which one people would vote for, between Jane and Perry, if they were the only two candidates running locally. (At this point, all respondents had to base their choice on was the pictures.)

Notionally, if appearance and gender mattered not at all, the result would have been a 50/50 split. Instead, Jane would win 67% of the votes and Perry 33%.

• Across the country, Jane’s support was never below 62% support, but her high water marks were 69% in Atlantic Canada and 75% in Quebec.

• Jane comfortably carried all age groups and did best among the youngest voters (71%) and least well among those 60+ (64%).

• Jane won both genders, but her margin among women was significantly larger than among men (men 60%-40% , women 74%-26%).

• Jane won among supporters of all three major parties, but her margin was largest among New Democrats (74%) and narrowest among Conservatives (58%).

• Along the same lines Perry found more support among those who felt the country was going in the right direction (39%) and that the government deserved re-election (43%)

What might be inferred from these numbers is:

• Both gender and physical images have the potential to significantly affect how voters size up candidates, absent any other information.

• Past tendencies to favour male over female candidates regardless of qualifications may be in the process of being replaced by a tendency to favour female candidates over males.

To more clearly understand the role of image versus gender, near the end of the survey, we substituted a different picture for Perry. While the sample exposed to the second picture was relatively small (N=136) his support level was 7 points higher with the second picture compared to the first. This tends to support the idea that both gender and appearance contributed to the wide margin favouring Jane, not gender alone.

Impressions of Jane and Perry

We then asked respondents to tell us a bit about what they saw in each of the two hypothetical candidates. The results again illustrate the degree to which visual impressions and gender both can influence thinking.

• On all 10 items tested, Jane came out on top.
• Jane was widely judged better for those in need (80%) and the environment (76%)
• Jane’s margin was narrow when it came to handling a crisis (54%), and the economy (52%)
• Jane was credited with better judgment (66%) and an ability to get things done (65%)
• Jane was also seen as more careful with taxpayers money (70%)
• 70% said that Jane’s values seemed closer to their own

These results suggest gender stereotypes continue to flourish: including the idea that women are more compassionate and concerned about the environment. While expectations of Jane are less lofty in terms of managing a crisis and handling the economy, she is competitive with Perry on those items.

One interpretation is that women are no longer automatically considered inferior on any items. Another interpretation is that there is a yawning 28-point gap between the things that are assumed to be Jane’s greatest and lesser strengths. And still a third interpretation is that men are now automatically considered inferior in many regards, including frugality, judgment and the ability to get things done.

Worth noting is that both men and women are capable of adopting the same stereotyping. As noted in the chart below, while 81% of women said Jane was best at caring for people in need, only 56% of women said she was best at ideas for the economy. The effect is exaggerated among men, but sizeable among women without question.

Do Their Ideas Matter?

As a final test we wanted to see how things might change if we attached a platform to each of the two hypothetical candidates. So for the purposes of the experiment we created two 3-point platforms, one of which was tilted conservative (tax cuts, safe communities, expanded trade), the other progressive/liberal approach (affordable childcare, environmental protection, help for the middle class).

We randomized the assignment of each platform so that half the sample was shown Jane with the left platform the other half with the right platform, and the same was true for Perry of course. We then asked “knowing this about their platform, how would you vote?”

The results:

• Introducing competing idea sets reduced the gap between Jane and Perry by about 10 points
• Jane still won by just over 10 points regardless of which platform she “embraced”

So, on the one hand, these results point up the fact that platforms matter, in overcoming biases and preconceptions, and in winning support. And, on the other hand, the results also suggest that platform is but one factor, and not necessarily always a deciding factor at that, when it comes to how voters might size up a candidate.

Conclusions?

Over the months ahead, we will do additional experiments designed to shed light into the things that voters react to, using online research technologies to furnish deeper insight that can be gleaned through phone surveys.

Our goal is to foster a discussion, by sharing basic information, and encouraging people to form their own interpretations. From our standpoint, these results tell us that visual images play an important role in how people relate to candidates, something that may be growing more important given the ubiquity and speed with which visual images are shared today. As well, the results suggest that gender stereotyping is very much alive, but may be adopting different forms today than would have been the case in past decades.

Methodology

Our survey was conducted online with 1,438 Canadians aged 18 and over from December 18 to 20, 2014. A random sample of panelists was invited to complete the survey from a large representative panel of Canadians, recruited and managed by Research Now, one of the world’s leading provider of online research samples.

The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association policy limits statements about margins of sampling error for most online surveys. 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 offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail and value added insight. Our team combines the experience of our Chairman Bruce Anderson, one of Canada’s leading research executives for two decades, with the energy, creativity and research expertise of CEO David Coletto, PhD. For more information, visit our website at http://www.abacusdata.ca/

For interviews, quotes, or to find out about our services, please contact Chairman Bruce Anderson at banderson@abacusdata.ca (613-882-0929) or CEO David Coletto at david@abacusdata.ca (613-232-2806)