As the first week of Canada’s 2025 general election comes to an end, our latest Abacus Data survey—our third poll of the campaign—finds the Liberals and Conservatives neck-and-neck nationally, with each party securing 39% of the committed vote among all eligible voters.

Among those most likely to vote, however, the Liberals edge ahead by two points, giving them a slim but notable advantage in a race that was once firmly in Conservative territory.

In this report, I’ll unpack the headline numbers, explore shifting demographic allegiances, and consider the increasingly important role of external factors such as Donald Trump’s presidency in shaping Canadian voters’ perceptions and choices

Liberals and Conservatives are tied nationally

Among all eligible voters surveyed, the Liberals and Conservatives remain deadlocked at 39% each. When we focus on likely voters—those who tell us they will “definitely” vote—Liberal support ticks up slightly to 41%, while the Conservatives hold at 39%. Although a two-point lead may seem modest, it represents a meaningful shift from earlier in the year and the efficiency of the Liberal vote means even a tie will lead to a Liberal government.

The New Democratic Party (NDP) remains in third place at 11% nationally. Given the party’s recent struggles, it will need to recalibrate quickly if it hopes to gain momentum and position itself as a viable alternative for progressive voters uneasy about either a Liberal or Conservative government.

Among all committed voters, the regional stories continue to evolve.

British Columbia: The Liberals and Conservatives are statistically tied, underscoring a highly competitive race in a province that has been a three-way battleground in previous cycles.

Ontario: Liberals hold a three-point lead, an improvement over their standing even a few weeks ago, suggesting that Liberal Leader Mark Carney’s campaign messaging may be resonating in the country’s most populous province.

Quebec: The Liberals now outpace the Bloc Québécois by 13 points, demonstrating a continued ability to consolidate the federalist vote and win over soft nationalist voters.

Atlantic Canada: The Liberals enjoy a commanding 21-point lead, building on the East Coast’s historical tilt toward the party in recent decades and reverting a shift to the Conservatives we had seen over the past two years.

One of the most notable shifts in this wave is the clear movement of young voters and older voters toward the Liberal Party:

Young Voters (18–30): The Liberals have taken the lead among younger voters, having closed the gap that the Conservatives have established for the past few years.

Boomers (60+): The Liberal lead among Boomers has expanded. The Conservatives continue to do well with the 45–59 demographic, but the fact that older voters—traditionally seen as more Conservative-friendly—are warming to the Liberals highlights how the dynamics of this campaign differ from past elections.

Millennials and Gen X (roughly ages 30–44 and 45–59): The Conservatives continue to hold a lead in these cohorts, particularly among those worried about day-to-day affordability. Pierre Poilievre’s strong emphasis on cost-of-living issues, housing, and the conomy may still resonate with these groups balancing mortgages, child care, and the challenges of raising families.

Growing Liberal Pool, Static Conservative Base

One of the fundamental indicators we track is the size of each party’s accessible voter pool—the proportion of Canadians who would consider voting for a party. Our latest data show the Liberal accessible voter universe has expanded slightly, while the Conservative pool remains essentially unchanged from the previous wave. If you picture this as an angler casting a net, the Liberals now have a larger net (more fish to catch), meaning that with effective messaging and ground organization, they can potentially convert more Canadians into active supporters on election day. The Conservatives, while still holding a sizeable base, appear to have plateaued in their capacity to attract new supporters.

Voter Enthusiasm and Desire for Change

Another critical finding is that 68% of Canadians now say they are “definitely” going to vote, a four-point jump since our last survey. Interest in the election continues to be markedly higher than in the 2021 campaign. Liberal supporters are more likely to say they will vote than Conservative and NDP supporters.

This desire to vote reflects heightened interest in the election. Overall, 72% of Canadians say they are very interested in the coming federal election (rating their interest an 8 to 10 on a 10-point scale). Older Canadians (those 60 and over) show the strongest engagement at 85%, compared to only 55% among those aged 18 to 29. Regionally, Saskatchewan and Manitoba top the list at 80%, with Quebec notably lower at 60%. There is also a modest gender gap, as 76% of men report a high level of interest versus 69% of women. Finally, Liberals are currently the most tuned-in supporters at 81%, followed by Conservatives at 77%, while the NDP base trails behind at 64%.

At the same time, the desire for change appears to be softening. While a majority still say they would prefer a change in government, those who strongly desire change have dipped from previous waves. Our poll also finds that 23% of Canadians now definitely want to see the Liberals re-elected—up from earlier readings. Taken together, these trends suggest the “time-for-a-change” sentiment that once fuelled Conservative momentum may not be as potent as it was, giving the Liberals some breathing room to solidify support. But there is still an audience for a change message.

Leader Favourability and Perceptions

Mark Carney (Liberal): Carney remains the most popular leader, with 42% positive impressions versus 31% negative, for a net +11 favourability. His reputation as a steady hand in times of turbulence—alongside a polished performance so far on the campaign trail—has seemingly built trust among a cross-section of Canadians.

He tends to perform especially well in Atlantic Canada and Ontario, where majorities lean positive, and he also garners higher approval among older Canadians (60+) than among younger cohorts. Carney’s support skews more female than male, although men are still more positive than negative on balance. The political breakdown shows that Liberal supporters are by far the most enthusiastic about him; in fact, well over half hold a favourable view. By contrast, Conservative voters split more evenly, though they tilt negative overall, and some NDP partisans remain neutral or only mildly positive. These dynamics help explain why Carney’s net favourability surpasses most other leaders at this stage of the campaign.

Pierre Poilievre (Conservative): Poilievre’s negatives have inched up to 45%, while his positives sit at 38%, resulting in a net of -7. A slight dip from our last wave, this shift may reflect increased scrutiny as the campaign heats up, particularly on his approach to economic policy and rhetorical style.

He does best among men, older Canadians, and especially among people who currently support the Conservatives—in these groups, a clear majority have a favourable impression of him. Regionally, Poilievre’s strongest support is in Alberta and the Prairies, where almost half or more view him positively, whereas he struggles most in Quebec, where fewer than one in three feel positively about him and a clear majority are negative. By contrast, women, younger voters, and those who support the Liberals or New Democrats register higher levels of dislike for Poilievre, pushing his net ratings downward in those segments.

Jagmeet Singh (NDP): Singh continues to be challenged by higher negatives relative to his positives, leaving him as the least popular federal leader. While some loyal NDP supporters remain enthusiastic about Singh’s leadership, the party has struggled to convert broader frustration about affordability into direct support.

Carney vs. Poilievre: The Leadership Gap

A particularly revealing set of questions asked Canadians to compare Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre on attributes like “captaining a ship through a rough storm,” “finding common ground to solve a dispute,” and “standing up to a bully.” Last week, Carney only held a two-point lead over Poilievre on crisis leadership (“captaining a ship”); this week, that gap has grown to seven points. He’s also ahead by nine points on “finding common ground” and four points on “standing up to a bully.” These incremental leads, while not decisive on their own, can shape the campaign narrative—especially for voters who are still sizing up the two leaders on the national stage.

The Trump Factor and Competing Frames

One of the most intriguing insights from this poll comes from retesting our “election frames.” We asked Canadians to choose whether this election is:

• Primarily about which party can best handle the challenges posed by Donald Trump, now President of the United States once again; or
• A question of whether it’s time for change at home in Canada, or affordability, or the economy.

A majority (54%) said the election is about dealing with Trump’s impact on Canada, while 46% said it is more about changing our domestic leadership. However, when we frame it as cost of living vs. dealing with Trump, affordability wins out by a margin of 58% to 42%. In other words, while Canadians generally care about how any prime minister will navigate the Trump presidency, pocketbook issues still dominate for most voters when forced to make a choice.

The differences in vote intention under these frames are profound. Those who see the election primarily in terms of opposing Trump and ensuring Canada’s interests are defended lean decisively toward the Liberals. Conversely, those focused on cost-of-living challenges lean strongly Conservative. Understanding these conflicting frames—and which one resonates most with swing voters—may very well determine the outcome of the election.

The Upshot: Advantage Liberal

Our third poll of this campaign confirms that the 2025 federal race is a tight, compelling contest. The Liberals have managed to narrow the Conservative advantage and now find themselves locked in a dead heat among eligible voters, with a modest edge among those most committed to casting a ballot. Regionally, gains in Ontario and Atlantic Canada are bolstering the Liberals, while the Conservatives are clinging to their core support in the Prairies and among specific age cohorts (Millennials and Gen X).

Meanwhile, the why of this election remains contested in the public mind. Economic concerns—especially cost of living—loom large. At the same time, Donald Trump’s threats and tariffs have many Canadians worrying about Canada’s place in a suddenly more uncertain international landscape. Liberals have seized on these concerns, positioning Mark Carney as the best captain in a storm, while Pierre Poilievre is still trying to focus minds on inflation, housing, taxes, and government spending hoping these can find a way to overshadow anxieties about Trump.

With a month left until voters head to the polls, the race remains fluid. But one thing is clear: Canadians are more engaged, the stakes feel higher, and the leaders face a voter population more prepared to be swayed by events on both sides of the border. Whether that heightened engagement redounds to the benefit of the Liberals, the Conservatives, or an insurgent NDP campaign looking to recapture disenchanted progressives remains one of the central questions of this pivotal 2025 election.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,800 adult Canadians over the age of 18 from March 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 +/- 2.3%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

This survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here:  https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

ABOUT ABACUS DATA

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail, and exceptional value.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Political campaigns are about more than promises; they are about perceptions. Voters carry in their minds a picture of what a leader will do once in office. That perception is then measured against another all-important question: should they do it? The answers to both questions—will they and should they—colour not only election outcomes but the tone and substance of national debate.

In our latest Abacus Data national survey, the first of the 2025 Canadian election campaign, we asked Canadians about their expectations of a hypothetical Liberal government led by Mark Carney and a Conservative government led by Pierre Poilievre. We also inquired whether people believe these new governments should take the policy actions they’re perceived as likely to take. These dual perspectives help reveal not just whether a policy is expected, but whether it’s wanted. And for the two frontrunners vying to replace Justin Trudeau’s government, these findings shine a spotlight on what could be pivotal vulnerabilities and opportunities.

What Canadians Expect of a Carney-led Government—and Whether They Want It

When asked what a Mark Carney-led Liberal government would be likely to do, respondents offered a mix of certainty, uncertainty, and conditional belief. A majority (57%) think such a government will manage the Canadian economy effectively through a difficult period, though only about one in four (23%) feel definite about that assessment. Similarly, 56% believe a Carney government will make it harder to own a gun in Canada, and 56% think it will deal with climate change seriously. Meanwhile, 56% also say they expect Carney to protect Canadian workers from the impact of tariffs that might come from U.S. policies—a crucial source of concern for exporters, manufacturers, and labour groups.

Support for foreign aid and the desire for a new direction both hover near the halfway mark. Just over half (53%) think the Liberals under Carney will maintain the amount Canada currently spends on foreign aid.

One of the more striking and important findings is that fewer than half (49%) believe Carney would “take Canada in a different direction than Justin Trudeau.” Importantly, of those 49%, only 16% say they feel definite that Carney will pivot sharply away from Trudeau’s approach. This hesitancy points to a real communications hurdle for Carney: Canadians consistently report a “broad and deep desire for change,” but they are not fully convinced that Carney represents that break.

From a strategic point of view, addressing this uncertainty is job number one for the Carney campaign. If Canadians primarily desire change, and Carney struggles to persuade them that he actually embodies a new direction, he may fail to harness that appetite in the months to come.

“Should” Carney Do These Things?

Public preferences about what a Carney-led government should do are telling. Fully 91% say the government should manage the economy effectively through this difficult period (61% “definitely should,” 30% “probably should”). Similarly high numbers want to see Carney protect Canadian workers from the impact of U.S. tariffs (90%) and make housing more affordable (also 90%). Canadians are aware of the housing crisis affecting every region of the country and want immediate, tangible measures—whether that’s through new supply initiatives, financial incentives, or more stringent regulations on speculators.

A similarly high percentage (88%) want Carney to take Canada in a different direction from Justin Trudeau. But as noted, far fewer than that are convinced he will do it. The gap between a strong “should do” consensus and a more tepid “will do” perception underscores Carney’s main credibility challenge.

Balancing the federal budget within five years is another area where Canadians show strong enthusiasm: 85% say Carney should aim to do so, with 41% definite on that front. Meanwhile, 77% believe he should deal seriously with climate change, while 73% want him to make it harder to own a gun in Canada. On personal income tax cuts, 76% of Canadians favour them, although fewer (31%) expect to actually see those cuts happen under Carney. This combination points to a policy environment where Canadians support a diverse set of actions—some typically progressive, some traditionally centrist or conservative. The unifying theme is that the vast majority simply want to see concrete results and not just talk.

What Canadians Expect of a Poilievre-led Government—and Whether They Want It

Turning to the Conservative side, we asked what Canadians think Pierre Poilievre and his government will do if they win, and whether they should do it. We have tracked these perceptions over the past few years so have some longitudinal data to compare.

There is a substantial proportion of Canadians who believe Poilievre’s government will eliminate the national carbon tax (62%), cut all public funding to the English CBC (53%), and end the national dental care program the Liberals established (52%). Similarly, 51% think he will end the national childcare program, while 47% believe he will “make it harder for women to have an abortion.” All of those perceptions have increased since the first time we asked back in May 2023.

This last point stands out: only 25% of Canadians want the Conservatives to restrict abortion access, yet nearly half suspect that Poilievre might attempt to do so. Such a perception represents a risk for Poilievre, because it can galvanize voters who lean pro-choice or worry about a reversal of rights.

Interestingly, while 62% think Poilievre will eliminate the carbon tax, just 10% definitely expect him to “take dealing with climate change seriously.” The numbers do show some fraction of Canadians believe Poilievre might do both—though a majority appear to see the removal of the carbon tax and climate action as mutually exclusive. On the other hand, 41% say they definitely want the party to address housing affordability, and in fact, 90% in total want the Conservatives to tackle that challenge. Poilievre has spent considerable political capital elevating the housing affordability issue, so it’s unsurprising that many think he will deliver on that file (41% say “definitely” or “probably” will, and 15% are unsure). Reinforcing this perceived focus on affordability—and showcasing a realistic plan—may be a defining aspect of Poilievre’s appeal to younger voters and Canadians worried about the cost of living.

“Should” Poilievre Do These Things?

When we gauge whether Canadians want Poilievre to do the things they think he might do, a clearer fault line emerges. A majority want him to pursue affordability (90%), balance the federal budget within four years (80%), and cut personal income taxes (69%). Two-thirds (69%) say the Conservatives should eliminate the national carbon tax—slightly less than the proportion that believe Poilievre will do so, but still a substantial number. It’s an indication that while the carbon tax has some defenders, a considerable swath of Canadians either distrust its effectiveness, or see it as an excessive economic burden at a time of inflation and recessionary threats. The fact that Mark Carney has tried to neutralize this issue by eliminating in his first days in office shows why he did so.

However, there is far less appetite for ending national childcare (33% say it “definitely” or “probably should” be ended) and even less for scrapping national dentalcare (28%). Canadians appear to value these new social programs: though they might be open to minor modifications, they do not want the rug pulled out from under them. A more explicit vulnerability for Poilievre is on abortion: only 25% believe the Conservatives should restrict access, but 47% expect they will. That divide is a serious risk area for a party aiming to attract moderate voters while also appeasing more traditionally conservative or socially conservative supporters.

Another interesting dimension is immigration. Only 33% want a Conservative government to welcome as many immigrants as the Liberals currently do, yet in general, Canadians tend to hold fairly positive attitudes toward immigration—especially around economic immigration and the need to fill labour market gaps. Nonetheless, it suggests a wedge issue the party might exploit if it can do so without appearing antagonistic or xenophobic to those in the centre.

Key Conclusions and Strategic Takeaways

These data highlight that what voters think a politician will do is as important as what they actually want them to do. For Mark Carney, the top-line takeaways are straightforward:

Protecting workers from tariffs: About 56% believe he will do it; 90% believe he should do it. There is alignment here—he’s perceived as relatively strong on financial and economic matters.

Making housing more affordable: Only 41% believe he will, yet 90% think he should. There’s a huge gap between the desire for action and confidence in that action.

Offering a new direction from Trudeau: Only 49% of Canadians think Carney will provide this new direction, even though 88% want him to. Overcoming any conflation with Trudeau’s legacy is critical if Carney is to harness Canadians’ significant appetite for change.

For Pierre Poilievre, some opportunities are equally visible:

Housing affordability and tax cuts: These remain core strengths. A large majority want him to tackle them, and a fair number believe he will. Doubling down on these issues could sustain or widen his appeal.

Climate change, social programs, and abortion: These are vulnerable spots. Many suspect he will roll back progress (or shift in an unwelcome direction) on these fronts, yet they don’t want him to. So he must walk a fine line to reassure Canadians—particularly moderate voters—that these fears are misplaced.

Ultimately, both leaders face a perception gap between what Canadians want and what they believe each leader will deliver. For Carney, that gap is largely about proving he offers genuine renewal rather than a continuation of the Trudeau era. For Poilievre, it’s about convincing voters that his focus on affordability and taxes does not come with unwelcome changes to social programs or women’s rights.

Campaign messaging that addresses these anxieties directly could decide who ends up winning the confidence of a country demanding both prosperity and progress. And in elections, as in all politics, bridging the gap between what people think you’ll do and what they want you to do can be the difference between electoral victory and defeat.

gender, we see further nuance. Younger women (18–44) are among the most likely to emphasize both affordability (53%) and healthcare improvements (22%). Meanwhile, older men and women (45+) are more inclined than their younger counterparts to choose “Dealing with Donald Trump” as a key factor. These gaps underscore how age and personal circumstances shape what feels urgent or potentially disruptive.

Put simply, if the ballot question becomes “Is your life getting more expensive, and do we need a fundamental change to fix it?” Conservatives and Poilievre win. If the question shifts to “Do we need a steady hand to protect Canada from Trump’s unpredictability (and the risks beyond our borders)?” then I think Liberals and Carney win.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,500 Canadians eligible to vote from March 17 to 20, 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 +/- 2.5%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

This survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here:  https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

ABOUT ABACUS DATA

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail, and exceptional value.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

Our latest survey, completed between March 20 and 25, 2025 interviewed 2,000 eligible voters and asked a few of our usual Canadian politics tracking questions. We will have another deeper dive into the election out this weekend. Be sure to subscribe to our newsletter so you never miss our polls.

Liberals take a numerical lead for the first time since 2022.

If the election was held today, we see the Liberals opening up a 1-point lead over the Conservatives among all committed voters. 38% would vote Liberal compared with 37% who would vote Conservative. The NDP is down again in third at 11% Since last week, the Conservatives are down 2, the Liberals are up 2 and the NDP is down 1.

Regionally, the Conservatives and Liberals are statistically tied in B.C., the Liberals now lead in Ontario (by 4), the Liberals lead by 12 in Quebec and by 9 in Atlantic Canada. The Conservatives lead in the Prairies.

Past Voters and Certainty to Vote

One really important shift is the growing number of previous Conservative Party voters who now say they will vote Liberal. 12% of past CPC voters say they would vote Liberal today. At the same time, 13% of past Liberal voters say they will vote Conservative.

But it’s the NDP numbers that are most revealing. More than half of past NDP voters say they are voting for another party or are undecided with 1 in 4 (26%) saying they will vote Liberal and 12% saying they will vote Conservative.

Among those most certain to vote, the Liberal lead grows to 3 points (40% to 37%) with the NDP falling 10%.

For the first time in our tracking, more Canadians now believe the Liberals will win the next election than do who think the Conservatives will.

What is Driving This?

Below the horse race, there are some fascinating and important shifts happening.

For example, when it comes to the federal government’s approval rating, there has been a complete reset of impressions. Today 41% approve of the Carney government’s performance compared with 25% who disapprove. Just look at the shift in only a matter of weeks.

Feelings about Carney: Views about Liberal Leader Mark Carney are largely unchanged from last week. He has a net favourable impression of +11.

Feelings about Poilievre: Poilievre’s net impression stands at -5, a slight improvement from last week. 39% of Canadians have a positive view of Mr. Poilievre, only 2-points less than Mr. Carney.

Feelings about Jagmeet SIngh: Singh’s net impression is at -12, largely unchanged from last week. Mr. Singh remains the least popular of the three main party leaders in Canada.

Trump: Impressions Continue to Deteriorate

Views towards U.S. President Donald Trump continue to get worse. Today only 12% of Canadians have a positive view of President Trump compared with 78% who have a negative view – an all-time high. At -66, President Trump’s net favourable is worse than any we’ve measure for any political leader.

Of note, 63% of those with a positive view of Donald Trump would vote Conservative today. Another 8% would vote for the People’s Party.

The Upshot: Advantage Liberal

The Liberals have firmly taken pole position for the first time in years, and these new numbers reflect a broader shift that goes beyond a simple bump in the polls. Since Mark Carney took the reins, Canadians seem to have reset their impressions, putting Justin Trudeau firmly in the rearview mirror. There’s a sense that many voters have let go of lingering grievances tied to the old Liberal leadership, creating fresh space for Carney’s message to take root. Litigating the Trudeau era appears less and less effective as public attention pivots to where each party will lead us next—especially in the face of growing global volatility and threats posed by Donald Trump’s presidency.

Critically, the Liberals aren’t just ahead on vote intention; they’re also more likely to turn out at the ballot box, suggesting a real enthusiasm advantage. Carney himself is in positive territory, which underscores the importance of strong personal brands in rallying both committed supporters and swing voters. Meanwhile, the Conservative brand hasn’t imploded, but it’s taken hits in key regions and demographics. With so many Canadians eager to move beyond past baggage, it looks like the leaders who can convincingly paint a forward-looking picture—and speak directly to the challenges posed by Trump—will have the upper hand.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,000 Canadians eligible to vote from March 20 to 25, 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 +/- 2.2%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

This survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here:  https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

ABOUT ABACUS DATA

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail, and exceptional value.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.

We’re at a turning point in Canadian public opinion: once defined by a scarcity mindset—where rising housing costs, healthcare strains, and job insecurity forced many to scramble for essentials—our collective outlook is now shifting toward something else: precarity. While concerns around what is available today still matter, the fear that core systems (healthcare, housing, social services) may fail is raising the stakes. Recent Trump tariffs and threats on Canadian sovereignty only add to this sense of instability and uncertainty, amplifying broader concerns about how resilient our society really is.

We recently released new research that indicates more and more Canadians are delaying major life decisions, and are worried that their finances and communities might not hold up. This isn’t just about feeling squeezed right now; it’s about questioning whether the future itself is secure. With an election in full swing, these anxieties will inevitably shape both voter choices and broader political conversations.

In this post, we’ll unpack how this mindset of uncertainty is playing out in the Canadian election. We will dig deeper into the precarity mindset and what it means for political behaviour. Understanding this shift is essential to offering genuine stability at a time when so much feels up in the air.

Measuring the Precarity Mindset: Five Levels of Vulnerability

For this research and beyond, we wanted to move past simple measures of economic outlook and capture the broader sense of vulnerability many Canadians are voicing. To do this, we created a “precarity index” that groups respondents into five levels of precarity based on how strongly they feel the pinch—or the panic—about future uncertainty.

From questions rating statements like “Ongoing global events often leave me feeling unsure” or “Frequent economic changes cause me to feel financially insecure” on a scale from 0 to 10. The scores below are the average rating. A higher rating signifies a higher degree of precarity and concern about that item.

Leading the pack, at 6.8, is the concern that ongoing global events create a constant sense of uncertainty about the future—reflecting how international headlines can unsettle everyday life. Close behind, at 6.6, is the worry that frequent economic changes foster financial insecurity. Two factors tied at 6.4: the challenge of making long-term plans in a turbulent world, and the anxiety caused by the overall unpredictability of life.

Climate change fears land at 5.3, signalling that while it’s not top of mind for everyone, it’s definitely a concern for many. Confidence that governments will shield Canadians from major crises hovers around 5.2, suggesting a lukewarm trust in public institutions. Finally, anxieties about rapid technological advances—like automation—sits at 5.1, underscoring the lingering unease around future job security.

Using these responses, we identified five groups:

Low Precarity (about 9%): The most confident (or ignorant depending on your perspective) Canadians—less likely to perceive sudden shifts as immediate threats to their personal wellbeing.

Mild Precarity (about 14%): Some worries exist, but they believe they can weather most storms.

Moderate Precarity (about 38%): The largest group, who feel regular anxiety yet aren’t convinced catastrophe is imminent. They’re concerned but still see room for optimism.

High Precarity (about 30%): Here, stress about finances, economic security, climate change, and technological change shapes day-to-day decisions, from career moves to voting intentions.

Extreme Precarity (about 9%): The most anxious segment, fearing that sudden and long-term disruptions—economic, environmental, or social—could upend their lives, and seeking security in the face of this intense sense of precarity.

Demographic Differences: Age, Gender, and Income

When we look at how age, gender, and income factor into these categories, several trends emerge:

• Age: There is a clear relationship with age and having a precarity index. Younger adults (under 30) are overrepresented in the High and Extreme Precarity categories and the incidence of precarity drops as Canadians age.
• Gender: Women lean more heavily toward the High and Extreme ends of the precarity scale than men. Persistent wage gaps, caregiving responsibilities, and concerns about social safety nets amplify feelings of vulnerability.
• Household Income: Lower-income households show higher precarity, but it’s not exclusive to them. Even Canadians with higher incomes report serious concerns—especially if they’re worried about job automation or market volatility undermining what they’ve built.

How Precarity Affects Voting Behaviour

Our data shows a clear relationship between level of precarity and federal vote intention. Among those with Low Precarity, over half say they’d vote Conservative, compared to only 15% of those in Extreme Precarity. Conversely, Liberal support surges to around 60% among the extremely precarious—significantly higher than among more secure Canadians. This pattern suggests that the more anxious people feel about Canada’s economic and social environment, the more likely they are to gravitate toward parties they believe will deliver immediate relief or strong government interventions.

However, partisan attachment—that is, identifying as a member or supporter of a particular party—doesn’t neatly align with precarity. Even respondents who call themselves “Conservative” appear at varying levels of precarity, and some ultimately plan to vote Liberal or NDP when pressed on their ballot choice. This indicates that while partisan identification remains an important part of how Canadians see themselves, actual voting behaviour can shift under the weight of an ongoing precarity mindset.

What this means in practical terms is that some Canadians who still identify with Conservative ideals may, in the face of financial or social anxiety, opt for today’s Liberal Party led by Mark Carney at the ballot box. Precarity, in other words, can shake even deeply held political allegiances.

Beyond the Ballot Box

Our survey data shows that the level of precarity someone feels is a significant factor in shaping their view of Donald Trump, with more precarious Canadians generally holding more negative opinions of the U.S. President. Among those with Low Precarity, just over one in five (21%) have a mostly or very positive view of Trump, while that figure drops to 16% for those in Mild Precarity. The percentage continues to decline for Moderate (13%) and High (13%) groups, reaching 12% among those in Extreme Precarity. In other words, the more vulnerable or anxious individuals feel about their personal economic and social standing, the less likely they are to have a favourable impression of Donald Trump – likely because Trump himself has created the precarity they seek shelter and protection from.

Interestingly, this relationship does not appear to extend to how people perceive the overall direction of Canada or which issues they prioritize at the ballot box. Canadians at all levels of precarity have fairly similar views on whether the country is on the right track or off on the wrong track. Even within the High and Extreme Precarity groups—those most uneasy about their futures—opinion is fairly split, suggesting that personal vulnerability does not automatically translate into a specific stance on national well-being.

Likewise, when asked to choose the top issues that will influence their vote—like cost of living, housing affordability, or healthcare improvements—individuals across all precarity levels generally highlight the same priorities. While those with higher precarity may feel a greater sense of urgency, the overall set of concerns is consistent across the board.

Taken together, these findings suggest that personal anxiety does shape how Canadians perceive certain international figures—notably Donald Trump—but doesn’t necessarily inform their broader outlook on where the country is heading or which issues they find most important.

What differs is the intensity of worry, not the issue itself. Nearly everyone feels the pinch at the grocery store or the pump; almost everyone sees mounting pressures on the healthcare system. Even climate concerns cut across the most of ideological spectrum. The difference is that people in the High or Extreme Precarity groups may be more anxious for swift, decisive action—having lost faith that “the system” will fix itself.

In other words, the entire electorate agrees on the big-ticket problems. The question is how urgently they need them addressed, and by whom.

Broader Election Implications

So what does the precarity mindset mean for the current federal election—and Canada’s future political landscape?

Voter Fluidity: Many voters are open to persuasion. While some remain firmly in a party’s camp, a significant share of Canadians—especially in High or Extreme Precarity—are willing to move if they hear concrete, credible solutions to their anxieties.

No ‘One-Size-Fits-All’ Approach: Parties can’t rely on a single message or assume that targeting one demographic will be enough. Both younger and older Canadians are feeling vulnerable, though for different reasons. Policies must speak to diverse anxieties, from economic security, to housing to healthcare and climate resilience.

Beyond Election Day: This mindset shift from scarcity to precarity won’t vanish once the ballots are counted. Canadians will continue to seek long-term stability, especially in the face of threats from Donald Trump, demanding more effective governance, tangible economic security, and stronger social safety nets.

Ultimately, our evolving sense of vulnerability is reshaping how Canadians make decisions—from the brands we buy to the political parties we support. Leaders who acknowledge the depth of this precariousness and propose meaningful, lasting solutions have a real opportunity to connect with voters across demographic lines. Conversely, those who dismiss or underestimate these anxieties risk missing a central undercurrent of this election and beyond.

Final Thoughts
Our latest data shows that Canadians aren’t just squeezed financially—they’re worried about whether key systems will hold up under the weight of global uncertainty. This precarity mindset crosses income brackets and party lines, complicating traditional assumptions about voter blocks. It’s also a warning sign: a public that feels insecure and unheard is a public open to political realignment. Just ask Justin Trudeau the effect when this happens.

If campaigns want to resonate in this new reality, they’ll need more than catchy slogans. They’ll need plans that signal genuine stability—affordable housing, reliable healthcare, and tangible readiness for future challenges. And whichever party forms government next, the work won’t end on election night. Canadians will be watching closely to see if today’s promises turn into tomorrow’s peace of mind.

Because in an age of precarity, trust is the currency that matters most.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,500 Canadians eligible to vote from March 17 to 20, 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 +/- 2.5%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Canada’s population according to age, gender, educational attainment, and region. Totals may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

This survey was paid for by Abacus Data Inc.

Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here:  https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

ABOUT ABACUS DATA

We are Canada’s most sought-after, influential, and impactful polling and market research firm. We are hired by many of North America’s most respected and influential brands and organizations.

We use the latest technology, sound science, and deep experience to generate top-flight research-based advice to our clients. We offer global research capacity with a strong focus on customer service, attention to detail, and exceptional value.

And we are growing throughout all parts of Canada and the United States and have capacity for new clients who want high quality research insights with enlightened hospitality.

Our record speaks for itself: we were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in the 2019, 2015, and 2011 federal elections.

Contact us with any questions.

Find out more about how we can help your organization by downloading our corporate profile and service offering.