What Americans think about Canada, tariffs, and a possible trade war: GZERO Media / Abacus Data poll

It’s been over a week since President Donald Trump’s inauguration and we are waiting to see whether he imposes the tariffs he said could come into effect on February 1. Trade tensions between the United States and Canada are once again front and centre. Given this, I’ve been wondering what American public opinion is on all of this. So I conducted a survey in partnership with our friends at GZERO Media.

I wanted to assess whether Americans support hardline trade actions, or whether Canada’s longstanding reputation as a friendly neighbour can still carry the day. I was also interested in what President Trump’s supporters though.

The GZERO/Abacus Data survey of 1,500 eligible voters in the United States —conducted January 23 to 24, 2025—offers valuable insights into how everyday Americans view Canada and the bilateral relationship.

What Americans Think About Canada

Overall, Americans hold Canada in high regard. The country’s net impression score sits at a robust +61, placing it among the most positively viewed foreign nations we tested with Australia seen only slightly more positively.

This friendly sentiment is further underscored by the fact that over half of respondents (54%) describe the U.S.-Canada relationship as that of “best friends” or “close friends,” while few see Canada as a rival or potential adversary. However, not all Americans share the same intensity of positivity. Respondents in Northeastern states and those who voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 election show particularly warm feelings, while Trump voters and residents of the Great Lakes/Midwest region are a bit more reserved. As trade disputes loom, these subgroup differences may help explain why certain Americans might be more receptive to escalated rhetoric—or more cautious about risking an alliance.

Perceptions about CUSMA/USMCA

Despite ongoing debates over trade policy, most Americans view CUSMA or USMCA favourably, especially when they learn that it was first negotiated by President Trump in 2018. Overall, just over half (52%) of respondents think the deal has been “very good” or “good” for the United States, compared to only 10% who deem it “bad” or “very bad,” while 38% remain neutral.

Among Republicans and Trump voters, however, the numbers are strikingly positive. A full 32% of self-identified Republicans rate the agreement as “very good,” with another 33% calling it “good.” The pattern is nearly identical among Trump voters: 32% “very good” and 33% “good,” indicating that fully two-thirds of Trump supporters have a favorable perception of the deal. Only 7% of Trump voters categorize it as bad or very bad, reinforcing their confidence in the agreement’s benefits.

This heightened approval appears to stem from the belief that President Trump secured advantageous terms for U.S. industries and workers. While voters from other parties—particularly Democrats—offer more tempered views, CUSMA clearly stands out as a Trump-era policy that resonates strongly with his base, reinforcing their support for his more aggressive trade posture. And it’s highly likely that President Trump could shift the views of his base to see the deal as ineffective today and in need of renegotiation.

More Context – What do Americans think and believe?

Americans hold a wide array of beliefs—some accurate, some misinformed—about Canada and the nature of the two countries’ economic relationship. As the possibility of another tariff fight looms, these perceptions matter greatly, shaping how receptive Americans might be to stiffer trade barriers or more aggressive rhetoric.

One of the clearest findings is that an overwhelming majority (86%) believe Canada and the United States are allies. Similarly, 84% accept that free trade between the two countries generally makes both better off. Yet alongside this goodwill, 56% also believe that Canada benefits “way more” from free trade with the U.S. By seeing Canada as the bigger winner, many Americans could be more inclined to back tariffs meant to “rebalance” perceived inequalities.

These attitudes intersect with beliefs about energy independence. A majority (65%) of Americans think the U.S. produces enough oil domestically to meet all of its needs, including a notably high proportion of Trump voters (75% when combining “definitely true” and “probably true”). Such confidence may diminish the perceived need for Canadian energy imports, making it easier for Trump to argue that imposing tariffs on Canada won’t spike gas prices or otherwise hurt domestic consumers.

Perceptions about defense also factor into Americans’ willingness to pressure Canada economically. Although 68% agree Canada contributes its fair share to NATO, when a split sample is showed the opposite claim, a full 48% simultaneously believe that Canada does not pay its way in defending North America. Among Trump voters, 62% see Canada as contributing too little, and more than half (54%) even consider Canada’s military “pretty much non-existent.” In contrast, only 36% of Harris voters think Canada’s military might be negligible. These views echo Trump’s longstanding criticism of allies for insufficient defense spending, fueling a sense that Canada “owes” the United States on multiple fronts—whether it’s financial or in trade concessions.

Other views amplify the sentiment that Canada may be taking advantage. About 1 in 3 Americans believe “most Canadians want their country to become the 51st state,” (despite Trump’s claim to that effect) and 44% think “millions of illegal immigrants” enter the U.S. from Canada. Only 32% believe Trump’s claim that much of the fentanyl in the U.S. originates across the northern border, although Trump voters are more likely to (42%). Although these are significantly overstated, they have real political implications: if voters accept that Canada is lax on border control or that Canadians themselves want deeper U.S. integration, they may see no harm in raising the stakes.

Interestingly, Saudi Arabia—which many Americans also regard as an important energy partner—elicits a more mixed response. Only about half (48%) of Americans consider Saudi Arabia a “friend,” and partisan differences are modest, suggesting Americans are split on the reliability of Saudi Arabia as an ally. By contrast, the vast majority call Canada a friendly nation. That being said, confidence that the U.S. can supply its own oil could overshadow Canadians’ potential value as a stable energy partner, at least among certain segments of the public.

All of these beliefs—especially the idea that Canada benefits unduly from free trade and invests too little in defense—make it easier for Trump’s base to support imposing tariffs. Indeed, a voter who thinks Canada is simultaneously freeriding on security, receiving disproportionate trade advantages, and failing to secure its own border is primed to back punitive measures if Trump argues they are necessary to protect American workers and taxpayers. That the broader public generally sees Canada favourably only somewhat tempers the possibility of a trade clash: Americans can like Canadians personally yet still believe they are “free riders” in urgent need of correction.

Nonetheless, the findings also show deep reservoirs of goodwill. Large majorities call Canada an ally, and 84% agree free trade is better for both sides overall. This underscores the complexity of public opinion: Americans can admire Canada’s closeness while endorsing trade restrictions if they suspect the United States is being shortchanged. For Canadian leaders and communicators, countering misconceptions—about energy dependence and migration while demonstrating it’s commitment to increase defence spending —may be crucial in defusing support for tariffs. By emphasizing the mutual benefits of open markets and highlighting Canada’s role in collective security, Canadians might sway those on the fence, even if more ardent Trump supporters prove harder to convince.

American Energy Sources – Perceived and Preferred

Digging deeper into energy, we asked Americans where they think they get most of their foreign crude oil and where they would prefer to get their oil.

One of the most striking insights from our survey is the gap between Americans’ perceived and preferred source of foreign oil. When asked which country currently supplies the most oil and gas to the United States, a majority (53%) point to Saudi Arabia, while only 22% choose Canada. In reality, Canada is the top foreign supplier, but many Americans’ first thought is that Middle Eastern oil dominates U.S. imports. This perception highlights lingering misconceptions about North American energy flows and underscores why some Americans may not feel a strong sense of dependence on Canada.

Yet, when Americans are asked where they would prefer the United States buy oil if imports remain necessary, the picture changes drastically. A full 52% choose Canada, far eclipsing Saudi Arabia (19%), Mexico (12%), Norway (7%), Russia (6%), and Venezuela (4%).

This preference for Canadian oil holds across regions, and there’s little difference between voters who supported Kamala Harris (58%) and Donald Trump (51%). Even so, the overall majority in every subgroup opts for Canada as their top choice supplier. These findings suggest a contradiction: many Americans see Saudi Arabia as the current leading supplier—possibly due to high-profile media coverage or long-standing U.S.-Saudi relations—while simultaneously viewing Canada as the ideal partner going forward.

The Possibility of 25% Tariffs on Canada

As we wait to see what happens on February 1, the proposed 25% tariff on Canadian-made goods reveals notable divides in American public opinion—both along partisan lines and between those living in border states versus elsewhere. While our story has already illustrated Americans’ complex mix of goodwill toward Canada and suspicions of “unfair” trade, this survey shows exactly how Trump voters, Harris voters, and residents of states adjoining Canada are sorting themselves on the issue.

Overall, 28% of Americans call the tariffs a “very good” or “good” idea, while 39% rate them “bad” or “very bad.” Yet when we break things down, partisan contrasts are stark. Among Trump voters, 44% describe the tariffs as a good or very good idea, compared to just 16% who think they are bad or very bad (the rest say “okay” or “don’t know”). By contrast, Harris voters come out heavily against the policy: only 15% back the tariffs, while 65% label them “bad” or “very bad.” This chasm reflects Trump voters’ belief that Canada gains more from trade and can better absorb the shock, whereas Harris voters—less convinced of a massive bilateral imbalance—are more concerned about economic disruption and diplomatic fallout.

A similar pattern emerges on the question of how tariffs will affect prices and the broader U.S. economy. Nationally, 25% foresee a positive effect on their cost of living, but 45% predict a negative one. Those in border states are especially likely to anticipate higher prices: 31% there think the impact will be negative or very negative, and just 19% anticipate a positive outcome. By contrast, Trump voters—regardless of region—are more sanguine. Around 36% of them see tariffs as benefitting America’s economy, compared to only 22% of Harris voters.

Border-state respondents, who often have direct business or personal ties across the boundary, also register more concern about the U.S.-Canada relationship deteriorating under tariffs. In these states, 44% think the tariff could have a negative effect on bilateral ties, while only 27% call it positive. Their vantage point might be shaped by potential disruptions to cross-border supply chains and local commerce. Meanwhile, in regions further from Canada, the negative ratings on U.S.-Canada ties are somewhat lower—suggesting that those communities might be less directly impacted, or at least less immediately aware of potential fallout.

Retaliatory measures add another layer. Nearly half (47%) of Americans overall fear that Canadian counter-tariffs would harm them personally, but this concern is more pronounced in border states (where consumers and businesses may rely on Canadian goods). Among Trump voters nationwide, however, only about a third see Canadian retaliation as a serious threat; many believe the U.S. can weather whatever Canada imposes, in part due to a perception of America’s superior economic clout.

Put together, these data illustrate both a wide partisan gap and important geographic nuances. Trump’s core voters largely back the tariff plan—some out of faith in his negotiating style, others due to the belief that Canada benefits disproportionately. Harris voters, on the other hand, mostly fear rising prices and diplomatic damage. And those closest to the border, who are often the most entwined with Canadian industries, are likelier to expect real negative consequences for everyday commerce and the broader relationship.

All of this reinforces the central tension: while many Americans like Canada and prefer its oil and other imports, the idea of punitive tariffs still holds appeal among a significant faction—particularly Trump supporters—who believe the U.S. has long been shortchanged. Whether that sentiment prevails will depend on how clearly Americans see the on-the-ground impact, especially in border communities that stand to feel the effects first.

Upshot

These findings paint a portrait of an American public torn between longstanding goodwill toward Canada and the view that Canada may be getting the better end of existing trade deals. On one hand, most Americans describe Canada as an ally, and large majorities agree that free trade is mutually beneficial. Many also prefer Canadian oil over imports from other countries and acknowledge Canada’s cultural and political closeness to the United States.

On the other hand, more than half believe Canada benefits “way more” from free trade, echoing President Trump’s narrative that tariffs are needed to level the playing field.

The gulf between Trump and Harris voters is pronounced. Trump voters not only show higher support for a 25% tariff, but they are also less concerned about the possible negative impacts on the U.S. economy and consumer prices. Harris voters, meanwhile, strongly oppose tariffs and worry about the ripple effects on inflation, diplomatic relations, and cross-border supply chains. These partisan divergences reflect different assumptions about who truly gains from trade and whether Canada meets its defense and immigration responsibilities.

Geography further complicates the picture. Americans in border states—who are more directly involved in commerce and travel with Canada—register deeper anxiety about the fallout from a potential trade war. They are likelier to anticipate higher prices and potential harm to local industries if tariffs escalate. This underlines the importance of these border communities: their direct exposure to cross-border trade could serve as a bellwether for how the broader American public will ultimately judge the practicality and fairness of tariffs.

For Canadian policymakers and business leaders, the lesson is that American goodwill can coexist with a willingness to “get tough” if voters feel the United States is being taken advantage of. Countering misconceptions about energy dependence, highlighting Canada’s defense contributions, and showcasing tangible economic interdependencies—especially in border regions—will be critical. The more Canadians can demonstrate that these punitive measures undermine shared prosperity, the likelier they are to sway uncertain or moderate Americans and mitigate the worst outcomes of an escalating trade dispute. But we also have to be aware that Trump voters are captive to his rhetoric and what they think and feel is likely all he cares about.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,500 American eligible voters from January 23 to 24, 2025.

A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.

The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 2.6%, 19 times out of 20.

The survey was weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched the U.S. population by age, gender, region, race, and education.

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.

Canadian PoliticsConsumer BehaviourPolls

Mark Carney is more likely to expand the Liberal Party’s voter pool than Chrystia Freeland

With Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stepping down and a new Liberal leader set to be announced on March 9, 2025, our latest poll takes a close look at how Canadians view the three main candidates vying for his job: Mark Carney, Chrystia Freeland, and Karina Gould.

Key Takeaway: Carney Leads in Popularity and Potential Support

Mark Carney stands out with stronger impressions than the other two candidates. He enjoys a better overall rating among the general public—33% positive vs. 20% negative (for a net +13)—and he’s also viewed most favourably by current Liberal supporters. His positive image is one reason he could attract a larger pool of voters for the Liberals if he becomes leader.

Chrystia Freeland is more widely known but has higher negative ratings, which drags down her net impression to about -1. Among Liberal supporters, she remains popular, though she trails Carney in terms of net favourability.

Karina Gould is less well-known to Canadians: most haven’t formed a strong opinion about her yet, and nearly half say they don’t know enough to comment. This leaves her with lower positives than the other two.

Among Liberal Supporters

Among Liberal supporters, Carney leads with a +59 net impression (64% positive vs. 5% negative), Freeland follows at +44 (54% positive vs. 10% negative), and Gould sits at +22, reflecting her lower profile as many remain undecided about her.

Voter Accessibility: More Voters Open to Carney

We also measured the size of each candidate’s potential “accessible voter pool”—people who might consider voting Liberal if that candidate becomes leader. Carney’s numbers suggest that if he can maintain his current popularity or improve it, he could lift the Liberal Party’s accessible voter pool by up to 7 points—bringing it to 49%. This is just a few points short of where the Conservatives currently stand, making Carney the most likely to broaden Liberal appeal.

Freeland’s boost, by comparison, would sit closer to 2 additional points, for a total of 44% accessibility.

The Upshot

With Trudeau’s departure, the Liberal leadership race is in full swing. Our poll indicates that Mark Carney not only tops the list in terms of net favourability among Canadians but also has the best shot at growing the Liberal vote. While Chrystia Freeland remains well-liked within the party, her negatives among the wider electorate are higher, limiting her potential reach. Karina Gould has room to build her profile but starts with less familiarity among voters.

The leadership campaign over the next 6 weeks could change these perceptions and views, but nor now, they suggest Carney is the frontrunner if the Liberals want to expand their base and compete neck-and-neck with the Conservatives in the next election.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,205 Canadian adults from January 22 to January 26, 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 survey was 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.

Canadian Politics

As Election Kicks Off, Ontario PCs lead by 23: Why Doug Ford is well positioned to be re-elected.

As the Ontario provincial election is about to get started, we conducted a survey of 1,021 eligible voters in the province from January 22 to 26, 2025.

The results indicate that the Ontario PC Party is in a solid position to be re-elected for the third time as Ford’s personal numbers and his government’s approval rating have improved since December.

In this report, we explore the reasons for this conclusion by looking at several key indicators we will track throughout the election.

PCs LEAD BY 9 OVER THE LIBERALS. NDP AT 22%

If the election was held today, the PCs would likely win another majority government. Overall, among all committed eligible voters in our survey, the PCs have 47% of the vote with the Ontario Liberals at 24% and the Ontario NDP at 19%. The Ontario Greens are at 7% while other parties get 3% of the vote.

Since December, the PC vote share is up 4, the Liberals are down 1 and the NDP is down 2.

The PCs are ahead in every region of the province.

WHAT EXPLAINS THE PC’S DOMINANT POSITION?

#1 – The desire for change isn’t high or intensive enough to seriously challenge the PCs.

Today, 48% definitely want to see a change in government while 22% definitely want to see the PC government re-elected. Everyone else is in the middle – either wanting change or keeping the government in power – but not caring too much about the outcome. Views are almost the same as they were at the start of the 2022 provincial election and similar to what we saw in Nova Scotia in November last year, a few weeks before Tim Houston and the NS PCs were easily re-elected.

Perhaps most important,  “change voters” – those who definitely want change – are split exactly evenly between the NDP and Liberal Party in terms of vote intention with 35% of change voters saying they would vote NDP and 35% supporting the Liberals. 11% support the Greens.

One of two things have to happen if a PC win is going to be threatened:

(1) Change voters need to consolidate around either the Liberals or NDP. Right now neither is winning the “change” primary, or

(2) More voters need to intensely want a change in government.

#2 – The Top Issues Favour the PCs, but Healthcare could be a vulnerability

Reducing the cost of living remains a top issue for more than half of Ontarians (60%). Healthcare, housing affordability, dealing with Trump’s tariffs, and growing the economy round out the top 5. 1 in 4 say reducing homelessness and poverty is one of their top three issues.

We see some variation across the political spectrum. PC Party supporters are more likely to rank affordability, the economy, and crime as a top issue. Liberal Party supporters are more likely to rate healthcare, long-term care, and education as a top issue while NDP supporters lean into housing affordability and homelessness and poverty reduction. But in all three cases, affordability, healthcare, and housing are the top issues for Ontarians.

#3 – Doug Ford’s personal image is stronger than the other party leaders and is in a better place than it has been for much of his time as Premier.

Beyond the desire for change and issue ownership, Doug Ford’s personal image remains relatively strong.

More people have a positive view of the PC leader than any of his opponents and Mr. Ford’s negatives are lower than they have been for the last two years. In fact, over the past 7 weeks, Mr. Ford’s personal image has moved above water with more viewing him favourably than unfavourably.

One of the wildcards for the election is how unknown the opposition party leaders are.

44% of Ontarians have a neutral impression or don’t know NDP Leader Marit Stiles. 39% have similar perspectives on Liberal Leader Bonnie Crombie. Crombie starts the campaign with the lowest net favourable score of all four major party leaders.

Beyond their images, when asked which leader would make the best Premier, Doug Ford easily wins, leading Ms Crombie by 25 points with Marit Stile a few points behind in third. .

Is calling an early election a liability for Ford and the PCs?

We reasked some questions we had asked back in June 2024 when there was some discussion of an early election. And the new results suggest that while there is some risk around an early election call – especially when the price tag is framed for people – it’s unlikely to cause the PCs too much trouble.

One reason is the speed at which the news cycle moves and the possibility of tariffs being imposed on February 1 means a discussion about an early election may not last past the first few days of the campaign.

UPSHOT

According to David Coletto: “As the election officially gets underway, Doug Ford and the PCs are once again in the driver’s seat. Their double-digit lead over the Liberals, combined with Ford’s improved personal image, puts them on solid footing to win a third term. Comparative data from past surveys suggests the desire for change isn’t deep or widespread enough to pose a serious threat—at least not yet.

For the PCs, the path to victory is clear: keep the spotlight on affordability (the top issue for most Ontarians) and the looming risk of Trump’s tariffs. If they can maintain control of the economic narrative and continue to project steady leadership, the arguments for change may not gain enough traction to derail them.

Meanwhile, the opposition parties have two interlinked goals: first, they must consolidate the sizeable number of voters who definitely want a change in government while convincing more of the importance and urgency for change. Right now, those voters are split evenly between the Liberals and the NDP. To do so, they need to shift attention to the policy areas where the PCs are more vulnerable—like healthcare, education, and ethics. However, it’s worth noting that public focus on the election’s timing and cost may fade quickly, especially if Trump’s tariffs dominate the early campaign narrative.

To break through, the Liberals and the NDP need to inspire a sharper, more intense desire for change. That could happen if either Marit Stiles or Bonnie Crombie captures the public’s attention and presents a compelling contrast to Ford. With both opposition leaders still unknown or neutral to many voters, standout debate performances or a unifying message on key issues (such as healthcare or cost of living) could be the catalyst they need.

The election opens with the PCs in command, thanks to a combination of stronger personal numbers for Doug Ford, a low-intensity appetite for change, and solid ownership of the top issues. Still, with several weeks of campaigning ahead, the opposition’s best chance lies in rallying anti-Ford forces under a single banner and hammering home their best arguments on healthcare, education, and ethics—if they can grab Ontarians’ attention before it’s too late.”

Join the Waiting List to Purchase the Detailed Tables for All the Questions in This Survey

METHODOLOGY

The survey was conducted with 1,021 eligible voters in Ontario from January 22 to 26, 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 +/- 3.1%, 19 times out of 20.

The data were weighted according to census data to ensure that the sample matched Ontario’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.

MediaPollsProvincial Politics

Abacus Data Poll: Conservative lead drops, but Liberals still 21-points behind

Our latest poll tracking opinions about Canadian politics was conducted from January 22 to 26, 2025 and interviewed 2,205 Canadian adults.

Vote Intention: Conservative lead drops, but Liberals still 21-points behind

If an election were held today, 43% of committed voters would cast a ballot for the Conservatives, 22% would vote Liberal, and 18% would support the NDP. The Bloc Québécois sits at 9% nationally, while the Greens are at 5% and the People’s Party at 3%, with no measurable support going to other parties.

Compared to our last update, the Conservative vote share has dipped by 3 points, while Liberal support is up 2. The NDP is down 1 point, and the Greens have also inched upward by 1 point. Despite the slight decline, the Conservatives continue to hold a substantial lead—21 points ahead of the Liberals.

Among those most certain to vote, the Conservative advantage grows: support for the Conservatives increases to 45%, the Liberals drop to 20% and the NDP gain one to 19% reflecting a 2-point boost for the Conservatives and a 3-point turnout suppression for the Liberals relative to the overall committed voter pool.

Regionally, the Conservatives lead in every region or province except for Quebec where the BQ is well ahead of the Conservatives in second and the Liberals in third. In Ontario, 45% of adults in that province would vote Conservative (down 5 since last time), with the Liberals at 27% (+4) and the NDP at 17% (-1).

The Conservatives continue to lead across all age groups and among men and women.

We also see the Conservatives leading across all levels of education, though the gap narrows among those with a university degree. Among Canadians with a high school education or less, 44% would vote Conservative, 21% Liberal, and 17% NDP.

Those with some college education or a college diploma show a similar Conservative advantage at 44%, with 19% opting for the Liberals and 20% backing the NDP.

Among university-educated Canadians, Conservative support declines slightly to 39% (down 4), while the Liberals rise to 28% (+4) and the NDP to 18%.

Learn about the game-changing tool from the Abacus Data team that makes it possible to estimate polling results to the riding level to improve advocacy and government relations.

Direction of the Country

When asked whether they feel the country is headed in the right direction or off on the wrong track, only 23% of Canadians believe things are going well, while 62% think the country is on the wrong track. These results remain near the lower end of our historical tracking, indicating a persistent sense of unease about the nation’s current direction. Despite improved vote share for the Liberals, the overall mood of the country remains quite sour.

Canadians continue to hold predominantly negative views of Justin Trudeau. Only about one in five Canadians (around 22%) say they have a positive impression of him, while approximately 61% express a negative view. This represents a net score of around -39, a slight improvement from last wave.

Perceptions of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre remain divided. 40% of Canadians have a positive impression of him, the same proportion with a negative impression. We have seen no real shift in views towards Mr. Poilievre in the past few weeks.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh’s image continues to be more negative than in the past. 29% hold a positive impression, while 41% say they have a negative view, giving him a net score of -12.

Meanwhile, Canadians’ impressions of Donald Trump remain decisively negative. Six in 10 have a negative opinion of him, while 21% view him positively. President Trump’s negatives have increased 5-points over the past two months.

Desire for Change Softens

One of the bigger shifts we have seen in public opinion is desire for change. Although almost half of Canadians continue to say they think it’s time for a change and feel there’s an acceptable alternative (49%), that number is down 7 points since mid-December (when Chrystia Freeland resigned as Finance Minister). At the same time, those who believe the Liberals deserve to be re-elected is up 4-points to 16% – a level we regularly measured prior to Freeland’s resignation and well below the 21% high point since tracking this question in June 2023.

Shift in Accessible Voter Pools

Turning to each party’s accessible voter pool, 51% of Canadians would consider voting Conservative, the highest among all parties but down 4 points in two weeks. The Liberal Party’s pool stands at 42% (a 4-point increase), while the NDP pool is at 39% (down 1).

This is the largest the accessible voter pool has been for the Liberals since the beginning of last year.

Big Shift in Election Outcome Expectations

The biggest change we have measured over the past two weeks comes when we ask people who they think will win the next federal election.

Today, 53% predict a Conservative victory, down from 62% on January 14. 17% now think the Liberals will come out on top, up 7. 8% foresee an NDP win, and 22% remain unsure. This represents a shift back to expectations we measured in November and December 2024.

The Upshot

According to Abacus Data CEO David Coletto: “There has been a change in opinions and intentions over the past two weeks, but that change has been small. Unlike some other polls that have been released in recent days, we continue to see the Conservatives well ahead of the Liberals but there is a shift in some key metrics that are worth noting.

While some measures have improved for the Liberals, they mostly represent a return to the levels they were before Chrystia Freeland resigned from cabinet. We have seen no change in how Canadians feel about Pierre Poilievre, the direction of the country, or the Prime Minister.

Mr. Trudeau’s resignation, the start of the Liberal Party’s leadership race, and Donald Trump’s inauguration has given the Liberals a boost and expanded their accessible voter pool, but we don’t see any evidence that political environment has fundamentally changed.

We will have new numbers on the Liberal leadership race later this week. Stay tuned.”

You can purchase the data tables for this survey here.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 2,205 Canadian adults from January 22 to January 26, 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 survey was 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.

Canadian Politics

Purchase Abacus Reports and Data

Discover actionable market and public opinion insights with our comprehensive reports and data tabulations.

From in-depth analyses to the latest trends, our resources empower your strategic decisions with accurate, easy-to-read information and in-depth datasets.

Make more confident decisions and better understand the world around you with our reports and data.

TitlePriceLink to Purchase
What Americans think about Canada, tariffs, and retaliation$50Purchase
Ontario Election Poll Wave 1 Data Tables$700Purchase
Canadian Politics Tracking – Jan 27, 2025 – Data tables$150Purchase
Canadian Politics Tracking – Jan 14, 2025 – Report$30Purchase

Marketplace

Navigating the Court of Public Opinion: Plan or React?

In today’s dynamic and fast-paced environment, public opinion can shift rapidly. Organizations that underestimate the power of perception often find themselves spending time, energy, and financial resources on damage control after a crisis has hit.

Yet many still consider the choice to invest in polling and research as optional—a “nice-to-have” rather than a vital component of their strategic planning.

The truth is that when it comes to the court of public opinion, every organization will pay in some form. The key question is whether you’ll pay to proactively plan, or pay more—often in multiple ways—to react under pressure.

The Real Cost of Doing Nothing
Picture a scenario where a controversial issue surfaces unexpectedly, catching your team off-guard. Without clear, data-driven insights about public sentiment, leadership scrambles to make hasty decisions. Suddenly, there’s a rush to hire a crisis communications agency, engage in frantic lobbying, or deploy an expensive, last-minute media campaign—reactive measures that often lack the finesse and thorough planning that proactive research could have provided. In these situations, you’re not just paying for services; you’re also paying in terms of your organization’s reputation, credibility, and employee morale. The total cost goes beyond the invoice you sign.

Proactive Insights: A Comfortable, Confidence-Building Choice
Proactive planning takes the guesswork out of decision-making. By investing in thorough polling and research up front, you gain a clear picture of what your stakeholders and the public think, feel, and believe. These insights help you craft messages, policies, and strategies that resonate. Instead of crossing your fingers and hoping to ride out the next wave of controversy, you’re positioned to navigate or even shape the conversation. It’s the difference between steering the ship with a reliable compass versus scrambling in rough waters without a map.

Moreover, taking a proactive approach is simply more comfortable and strategic. You’re not making decisions in the heat of the moment, under a barrage of media scrutiny or stakeholder pressure. You’re able to plan, test your messaging, and roll out communications that truly connect. This not only reduces stress but also places you on solid ground when your board members, shareholders, or customers ask for the rationale behind your decisions.

A Reality, Not a Sales Pitch
Some may view this as a sales pitch. But in reality, it’s a reflection of what many organizations have already experienced first-hand: the discomfort and high cost of reactive crisis management. If you’ve endured a PR firestorm or scrambled to control a narrative you didn’t anticipate, you understand precisely how costly and unsettling it can be—financially and reputationally. Investing in research from the start ensures you’re prepared to address issues before they escalate, turning a potential crisis into a manageable conversation.

The Abacus Data Approach
At Abacus Data, we specialize in helping organizations gather the insights they need to confidently navigate public sentiment. Our team uses robust methodologies that go beyond surface-level data. We work closely with clients to understand the nuances of their challenges and craft research solutions that drive meaningful action. Whether it’s polling, focus groups, or advanced analytics, we equip you with the knowledge to make informed decisions—long before an issue becomes a headline.

But we do far more than research. We’re strategists who see the bigger picture—how each piece of insight we gather connects to the broader context of your organization and industry. We’re adept at diving into the nuances of public perception, anticipating shifts in opinion, and uncovering unmet needs that others might overlook. Our clients don’t just rely on us for numbers; they trust our interpretation of those numbers to drive real-world decisions and outcomes. The proof is in their testimonials—don’t just take our word for it. Ask the organizations we’ve worked with; they’ll tell you firsthand how our commitment to comprehensive insights and our storytelling abilities (our secret sauce) sets us apart in a crowded marketplace.

If not now, when?
In the court of public opinion, you will always pay for your approach—either through strategic, proactive planning or through reactive efforts when challenges hit. The difference in outcomes can be monumental. By engaging our team for research and insights, you’re choosing the safe, proactive, and ultimately more cost-effective option.

Reach out to us today to learn how we can help you navigate public opinion with clarity, confidence, and a solid strategy.in the past. By doing so, you can better discern whether a dramatic lead is likely to hold or if it reflects a momentary snapshot of a particularly vocal minority.

Contact me now and let’s chat.

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.

BlogCanadian Politics

Making Sense of Divergent Polls

Our latest Abacus Data poll finds the Conservatives maintaining a 26-point lead, even as two recent polls suggest the gap may be tightening.

Naturally, people are left wondering: which of these estimates is more likely to be correct, and why can polls differ so dramatically? One key explanation lies in the methods used to collect data and the type of respondent each method tends to capture.

When pollsters talk about Interactive Voice Response (IVR) polling versus online polling, they are describing two distinct processes to collect data. IVR relies on automated phone calls, where recipients press buttons to register their opinions. Because most people either ignore or hang up on automated calls, the response rate tends to be very low. Those who do answer these calls are often the most motivated, most animated, or in some cases, the most upset. This can lead to a form of response bias, where the people who stay on the line are not necessarily representative of the wider population, but rather a vocal subset that feels strongly enough to participate.

One notable example comes from Canada’s 2021 federal election, when various IVR polls projected much higher vote shares for the People’s Party of Canada (PPC) than the party actually received. Some surveys suggested the PPC might capture nearly twice the percentage they ultimately secured. Why did this happen? PPC supporters were highly engaged and dissatisfied with mainstream options, so they were more likely to respond to phone polls. Their strong enthusiasm translated into an exaggerated presence in IVR data. Although IVR can sometimes detect an emerging wave—if those passionate views eventually spread to a broader audience—it can also simply measure the fervor of a minority, rather than accurately gauge mainstream opinions.

Final polls in the 2021 Canadian General Election Source: Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2021_Canadian_federal_election

The start of the Liberal leadership race and Prime Minister Trudeau’s resignation could have a similar energizing effect on Liberal-oriented voters, prompting them to become more active participants in polling. Suddenly, a group that may have been apathetic or less engaged finds a renewed motivation to express its views, whether through IVR calls or SMS invitations to online surveys. While that surge in responses can create the impression of a major shift in voter support, it may simply reflect temporary excitement or newfound engagement around leadership changes rather than a lasting realignment in the electorate.

On the other hand, online polling generally tends to secure a more stable sample by offering incentives such as reward points, small payments, or gift cards. These incentives encourage participation from a wider range of individuals, including those who may be less motivated by politics alone. Consequently, online panels can be better equipped to provide a representative cross-section of the electorate, smoothing out the peaks of enthusiasm or anger that can dominate in IVR surveys.

So, returning to the question of which polls are correct regarding the Conservatives’ lead: it might depend on how each poll is conducted and whose voices it manages to capture.

An IVR poll might overestimate support among a certain group if that group is particularly animated, while an online poll might present a more consistent picture if it successfully engages a diverse set of participants. Neither method is entirely without flaw—IVR might detect a growing passion before it becomes mainstream, while online polling might miss some very niche but fervent opinions.

My experience is that online polling tends to be more consistent and slower to shift while random sampling using IVR or live interview swings more. Just look at the differences in mode during the last federal election to see evidence of this.

Ultimately, informed voters and observers should look at the methodology used in each survey and weigh how that method’s strengths and weaknesses may affect the reported numbers. It is also wise to compare multiple polls over time and the performance of the mode in the past. By doing so, you can better discern whether a dramatic lead is likely to hold or if it reflects a momentary snapshot of a particularly vocal minority.

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.

BlogCanadian PoliticsUncategorized

Abacus Data Poll: Conservatives lead by 26 as Liberal leadership election kicks off

Our latest poll tracking opinions about Canadian politics was conducted from January 9 to 14, 2025 and interviewed 1,500 Canadian adults.

Vote Intention: Conservatives Maintain a Strong Lead

If an election were held today, 46% of committed voters would cast a ballot for the Conservatives, 20% would vote Liberal, and 19% would support the NDP. The Bloc Québécois sits at 8% nationally, while the Greens are at 4% and the People’s Party at 3%, with no measurable support going to other parties.

Compared to our last update (January 9), the Conservative vote share has dipped by 1 point, while Liberal support remains unchanged. The NDP has edged up by 1 point, and the Greens have also inched upward by 1 point. Despite the slight decline, the Conservatives continue to hold a substantial lead—26 points ahead of the Liberals.

Among those most certain to vote, the Conservative advantage grows: support for the Conservatives increases to 49%, the Liberals drop to 18%, and the NDP sits at 20%, reflecting a 3-point boost for the Conservatives and a 2-point turnout suppression for the Liberals relative to the overall committed voter pool. BQ support among these likely voters reaches 10%, the Greens hold at 3%, the People’s Party stands at 2%, and less than 1% indicate support for another party.

Regionally, the Conservatives lead in every region or province except for Quebec where the BQ is well ahead of the Conservatives in second and the Liberals in third. In Ontario, 50% of adults in that province would vote Conservative, with the Liberals at 23% and the NDP at 18%.

The Conservatives hold a clear lead among all age groups, though the degree of that lead varies. Among younger Canadians aged 18 to 29, 43% would vote Conservative, 21% Liberal, and 22% NDP, with smaller shares for the Greens (6%), Bloc Québécois (4%), and People’s Party (4%).

Canadians aged 30 to 44 also tilt towards the Conservatives at 46%, followed by the Liberals (21%) and NDP (21%). Again, minor parties share the remainder, with 6% for the BQ, 4% for the Greens, and 3% for the People’s Party.

For those aged 45 to 59, Conservative support climbs to 49%, while 15% back the Liberals and 22% support the NDP. The BQ stands at 9%, the Greens at 3%, and the People’s Party at 3% in this age group.

Among those aged 60 and over, 47% intend to vote Conservative, compared with 22% for the Liberals and 13% for the NDP. In this older cohort, 11% would vote BQ, 4% Green, and 2% People’s Party. While support for the Conservatives remains highest among Canadians 45 to 59, the party maintains a strong lead in every age bracket.

The Conservatives continue to lead among both men and women, though the size of that lead varies by gender. Among men, 51% say they would vote Conservative, while 17% would support the Liberals, and 16% back the NDP. Another 9% would vote Bloc Québécois, 4% for the Greens, and 3% for the People’s Party.

Among women, 42% indicate they would vote Conservative, followed by a tie between the Liberals and the NDP at 23% each. Support for the Bloc Québécois stands at 6% among women, with 4% opting for the Greens and 2% for the People’s Party.

We also see the Conservatives leading across all levels of education, though the gap narrows among those with a university degree. Among Canadians with a high school education or less, 48% would vote Conservative, 18% Liberal, and 15% NDP, with the remaining support split among the Greens (6%), Bloc Québécois 9%), and People’s Party (3%).

Those with some college education or a college diploma show a similar Conservative advantage at 48%, with 16% opting for the Liberals and 19% backing the NDP. The BQ garners 10% among college-educated voters, while the Greens and People’s Party each receive support from fewer than 5%.

Among university-educated Canadians, Conservative support declines slightly to 43%, while the Liberals rise to 24% and the NDP to 22%. The Bloc Québécois stands at 4%, and the Greens and People’s Party each attract around 3% support among this group.

Learn about the game-changing tool from the Abacus Data team that makes it possible to estimate polling results to the riding level to improve advocacy and government relations.

Direction of the Country

When asked whether they feel the country is headed in the right direction or off on the wrong track, only 24% of Canadians believe things are going well, while 64% think the country is on the wrong track. These results remain near the lower end of our historical tracking, indicating a persistent sense of unease about the nation’s current direction. Canadians also express heightened pessimism about global affairs: only 15% see the world as heading in the right direction, while 73% believe it is off on the wrong path. Attitudes toward the United States mirror this negativity, with 20% feeling the U.S. is moving in the right direction compared to 67% who say it is on the wrong track. Overall, these findings underscore widespread concern both about Canada’s domestic trajectory and international conditions.

Top Issues

When asked to name the three most important issues facing Canada today, the rising cost of living dominates, cited by 67% of respondents. Healthcare stands at 40%, while housing affordability and accessibility sits at 38%. The economy is close behind at 37%, followed by immigration at 28%. Notably, 26% mention Donald Trump and his administration, a figure that has continued to rise, whereas only 15% name climate change and the environment despite recent wildfires around Los Angeles. Crime and public safety, inequality and poverty, and job security and unemployment also rank in the double digits, while concerns about China and Russia, Indigenous reconciliation, and Chinese election interference remain relatively low. Overall, pocketbook issues continue to be the most urgent, reflecting the economic and financial worries on most Canadians’ minds.

Canadians continue to hold predominantly negative views of Justin Trudeau. Only about one in five Canadians (around 20%) say they have a positive impression of him, while approximately 64% express a negative view. This represents a net score of around -44, essentially unchanged from earlier this month. The announcement of his resignation as Liberal leader has done little so far to shift people’s feelings about him.

Perceptions of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre remain divided. Around 41% of Canadians have a positive impression of him, compared to roughly 40% who feel negatively. While his overall image is not as sharply negative as Trudeau’s, and he is still the only federal leader with a net favourable rating of +2.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh’s image has suffered in recent weeks. Around 29% hold a positive impression, while roughly 42% say they have a negative view, giving him a net score of about -13. This marks the highest level of unfavourability recorded for Singh in our tracking, reflecting a gradual erosion of his once more balanced brand.

Meanwhile, Canadians’ impressions of Donald Trump remain decisively negative. Six in 10 have a negative opinion of him, while 21% view him positively. With Trump set to assume the U.S. presidency again, these numbers underscore a continued wariness among Canadians toward his political style and agenda and a drop in positivity over the last several weeks.

Party Best Able to Handle Top 3 Issues

When asked which party is best able to handle each of the top issues, only those who selected the issue among their top three concerns were polled. The Conservatives maintain a pronounced advantage on economic and “pocketbook” issues.

For instance, among those who say the economy is a key concern, 53% believe the Conservatives are best equipped to tackle it, compared to 13% who pick the Liberals and 11% the NDP. On cost of living, 45% believe the Conservatives have the best plan, followed by 16% for the NDP and 13% for the Liberals.

The gap narrows somewhat on Donald Trump, where 32% think the Conservatives are best positioned to manage issues related to the incoming U.S. President, while 26% choose the Liberals and 9% select the NDP. Although the Conservatives still lead on the Trump file, the margin is smaller than on other key priorities such as crime and immigration, where over 60% say they trust the Conservatives more than any other party.

Turning to each party’s accessible voter pool, 55% of Canadians would consider voting Conservative, the highest among all parties. The NDP’s pool stands at 40%, the Liberals at 38%, and the Greens at 27%. Regionally, the Conservatives do best in Ontario and British Columbia, each over 55%, while in Quebec, only 34% would consider voting Conservative, compared to 52% who would consider the Bloc Québécois.

Notably, among those who voted Liberal in 2021, only 75% say they would still consider the party now, and among current Conservative supporters, virtually all (94%) would continue to consider the Conservatives.

When asked who they believe will win the next election, 62% predict a Conservative victory, up from 61% on January 9 and 50% back in October. Only 10% think the Liberals will come out on top, 7% foresee an NDP win, and 20% remain unsure. This gradual but steady climb in the Conservative number signals growing confidence and recognition that the Conservatives will win the next election. This perception has not impacted support for the party.

Finally, the desire for change continues to loom large over the federal political landscape. Fully 88% believe it is time for change, either because they see a good alternative (52%) or simply want to replace the Liberals despite hesitations about the alternatives (36%). Only 12% think the Liberals deserve another term. Since Justin Trudeau’s resignation announcement, his name has been removed from the re-election question, but the overall results have shifted little, indicating negligible impact so far on how Canadians view the Liberals’ electoral prospects.

The Upshot

According to Abacus Data CEO David Coletto: “The Liberal leadership race is officially underway, as Chrystia Freeland launches her campaign following Mark Carney’s announcement last Thursday. Whether this contest can capture the public’s attention and reset the narrative remains to be seen, but we will be tracking closely how any leadership momentum might affect voter perceptions.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s inauguration on Monday is drawing significant focus, with Canadians concerned about whether he will follow through on the tariff threats that have loomed over cross-border relations.

For now, the Conservatives remain in the driver’s seat, outpacing every other party in most demographic groups and across every region outside Quebec. As the leadership race unfolds and the Trump presidency begins, the key questions for the Liberals and other parties revolve around whether they can reshape the political landscape—and win back voters currently leaning so strongly toward the Conservatives.”

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,500 Canadian adults from January 9 to January 14, 2025, 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 survey was 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.

Canadian Politics

Over 60% of Canadians Say No Level of Government Is Doing Enough on Housing

We continue our examination of Canada’s housing crisis in partnership with the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA), the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness (CAEH), and the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada (CHF Canada). This study explores public opinion on the role of government in the current housing landscape, based on a survey of 6,000 Canadian adults aged 18 and older, conducted from September 26 to October 9, 2024.

It is important to note that, while this research was conducted prior to the return of Donald Trump and his renewed threats of tariffs, as well as the resignation of Justin Trudeau and the Liberal leadership race likely leading to a spring election, the housing crisis remains a pressing issue for many Canadians. Challenges with affordability and accessibility continue to impact millions of Canadians, highlighting the need for housing to remain a top priority amid political and economic uncertainty. This report offers an important snapshot of public opinion on these challenges and the role of government in addressing them.

Views on the Main Causes of Canada’s Housing Crisis

When examining the main causes of the housing crisis, Canadians highlight several key factors. Nearly half (49%) point to insufficient affordable housing being built as a primary driver, while 46% cite high mortgage rates making homeownership more difficult. Population growth outpacing housing supply is identified by another 46%, and 44% attribute the crisis to the high costs associated with building new homes.

Political affiliations reveal differing perspectives on the root causes. Federal Conservative supporters are more likely to emphasize high mortgage rates, population growth, construction costs, and the role of foreign buyers. In contrast, federal NDP supporters are significantly more likely to blame the lack of affordable housing being built, developers prioritizing profits over affordability, insufficient government action, and a shortage of rental properties. Federal Liberal supporters, however, do not stand out as significantly more likely than Conservatives or NDP supporters to identify any one specific cause. These differences highlight how political leanings shape views on the underlying issues driving Canada’s housing crisis.

Attribution of Blame for Housing Difficulties

Canadians are clear about who they believe is making it harder to buy a home. Financial institutions are cited by 45% as key contributors, while 43% hold builders and developers responsible. Government at all levels is also widely blamed, with 42% pointing to the federal government, 40% to provincial governments, and 38% to municipal governments. Conservative supporters are particularly likely to attribute blame to all three levels of government. These findings highlight the perception that both private sector actors and government policies are impacting Canadians ability to purchase a residential property.

When it comes to renting, 45% of Canadians believe the private sector, including landlords, bears the most blame. The federal and provincial governments are also cited by 39% each, while 36% hold builders and developers responsible. These responses highlight that frustrations extend beyond homeownership, with Canadians viewing both public and private sectors as significant contributors to the challenges of renting as well.

Widespread Dissatisfaction with Government Leadership on Housing

Canadians express significant dissatisfaction with the leadership shown by governments at all levels in addressing housing affordability. Specifically, 77% are dissatisfied with the federal government’s leadership, 74% with provincial governments, and 70% with municipal governments. Dissatisfaction is particularly pronounced among federal Conservative and NDP supporters, who report higher levels of discontent compared to federal Liberal supporters.

Further, three in five Canadians believe no level of government is doing enough to address the housing crisis – 68% percent say the federal government has not done enough, 65% criticize provincial governments, and 62% feel their municipal government is falling short.

This widespread dissatisfaction highlights a critical gap between public expectations and government action in tackling housing crisis, including experiences of homelessness.

Expectations for Accountability and Leadership

Canadians believe all levels of government share responsibility for solving the housing crisis, with 65% pointing to the federal and provincial governments and 53% to municipal governments. Beyond government, 19% of Canadians think developers and financial institutions should also bear responsibility.

Trust in leadership to resolve the housing crisis remains low, with only 29% of Canadians believing Pierre Poilievre has the best strategy, while just 19% trust their municipal or provincial governments. In contrast, non-governmental entities inspire greater confidence, with 36% trusting non-profits and 33% trusting community organizations to drive progress.

This creates a notable disconnect between who Canadians believe should take responsibility for solving the crisis and who they trust to deliver meaningful solutions. While governments are seen as primarily accountable, the lack of trust in their leadership highlights a pressing need for governments to rebuild public confidence by engaging with trusted partners, such as non-profits and community organizations, to address the housing crisis collaboratively.

Preference for Collaborative Solutions

Nearly half of Canadians (45%) favor a collaborative approach involving government, private, and non-profit sectors to tackle the crisis. Meanwhile, 33% believe governments should take sole responsibility. This preference highlights the public’s desire for a coordinated, multi-faceted strategy to address housing challenges.

Potential solutions focus on increasing housing supply and affordability through innovative approaches. 46% of Canadians support adopting faster, more efficient construction methods to address growing housing demand. Similarly, 46% advocate for federal policies that encourage municipalities to reduce development charges, making it more cost-effective for developers to build new homes. These strategies highlight public support for practical measures that could help alleviate the housing crisis by addressing both supply and affordability challenges.

Housing a Key Issue for Voters

Housing affordability is set to play a critical role in the next election. Over half (54%) of Canadians rank it as a top issue, with support particularly strong among younger voters aged 18-44 (58%-60%) and urban residents (59%).

Despite housing being a top priority for many Canadians, there is widespread skepticism about the ability of party leaders to address the crisis effectively. Only 31% believe Pierre Poilievre and the CPC have a viable housing strategy, while even fewer, 18%, view the NDP as having an effective plan. Further, Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party were viewed as having the most effective strategy to address housing by just 16% of Canadians.

Furthermore, 21% of voters remain undecided on which candidate offers the best approach, and 12% believe none of the current candidates have policies capable of addressing the issue. This uncertainty underscores a critical opportunity for political leaders to step forward with bold, clear, and actionable strategies that resonate with voters and rebuild trust in their ability to tackle one of Canada’s most pressing challenges.

The Upshot

The findings of this survey highlight the widespread dissatisfaction Canadians feel with government leadership on housing, with significant blame placed on federal, provincial, and municipal governments for failing to address the crisis. This dissatisfaction is not only a reflection of frustration with the current housing challenges, and growing experiences of homelessness, but also a critical signal to political parties as they prepare for the next election. Canadians are not just demanding action – they are looking for leadership that understands the depth of the problem and presents tangible solutions at all levels of government.

Understanding this dissatisfaction is essential for political parties seeking to build trust and connect with voters. With housing affordability ranking as a top priority for over half of Canadians heading into the next election, parties that acknowledge these concerns and outline clear, credible strategies for long-term solutions stand to gain significant political capital. This is particularly important as Canadians increasingly look for leadership on the issue, signaling a need for government to rebuild public trust by demonstrating competence, innovation, and collaboration.

The housing crisis cannot be solved with short-term fixes. Canadians are calling for a comprehensive approach that not only addresses immediate affordability issues but also ensures long-term sustainability. For political parties, this is both a challenge and an opportunity to demonstrate bold leadership, develop policies that resonate with voters, and position themselves as the drivers of meaningful change in one of Canada’s most pressing issues.

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 6,000 Canadian adults from September 26 to October 9, 2024. A random sample of panelists were invited to complete the survey from a set of partner panels based on the Lucid exchange platform. These partners are typically double opt-in survey panels, blended to manage out potential skews in the data from a single source.

The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of the same size is +/- 1.27%, 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.

This survey was paid for by the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA), the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness (CAEH), and the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada (CHF Canada). Abacus Data follows the CRIC Public Opinion Research Standards and Disclosure Requirements that can be found here: https://canadianresearchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/searchinsightscouncil.ca/standards/

About Abacus Data

We are the only research and strategy firm that helps organizations respond to the disruptive risks and opportunities in a world where demographics and technology are changing more quickly than ever.

We are an innovative, fast-growing public opinion and marketing research consultancy. 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.

We were one of the most accurate pollsters conducting research during the 2021 Canadian election following up on our outstanding record in 2019.

Contact us

Canadian PoliticsHousingInsightsProvincial Politics

Abacus Data Poll: 1 in 4 Canadians are either open to consider or definitely want Canada to join the United States

Over the past week, Abacus Data conducted a national survey of 1,500 Canadian adults to understand public reactions to recent comments by former U.S. President Donald Trump speculating about Canada potentially becoming “the 51st state” or otherwise being annexed by the United States. The survey ran from January 9 to January 14, 2025, capturing Canadians’ awareness of Trump’s statements, their interpretations of his intent, their openness to the idea of Canada joining the U.S., and views about the consequences of a potential 25% tariff on Canadian goods. The margin of error for a comparable probability-based random sample of this size is ±2.3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. The results are weighted according to census data by age, gender, educational attainment, and region.

Below, we highlight key findings from the survey and consider the implications for Canadian politics, public policy, and the national conversation about Canada’s future relationship with the United States.

Awareness of Trump’s Remarks: Most Canadians are aware.
We began by asking Canadians if they had heard anything about Donald Trump saying that Canada could become the 51st state or be annexed by the U.S. An overwhelming 91% reported being aware of these comments. This high level of awareness is consistent across political lines, with 94% of Liberal supporters, 87% of Conservative supporters, and 91% of NDP supporters having at least some familiarity with the remarks.

Several factors may explain why virtually all Canadians have heard about Trump’s musings: continued high-profile media coverage of U.S. politics in Canada, the enduring fascination with Trump’s polarizing style, and the intrinsic shock value of suggesting that Canada might fold into the United States. Taken together, these factors appear to have propelled the story to near-universal visibility.

Learn about the game-changing tool from the Abacus Data team that makes it possible to estimate polling results to the riding level to improve advocacy and government relations.

Is Trump Joking, Serious, or Something in Between?

We next asked Canadians how seriously they interpret Trump’s remarks. The answers show a country split on what exactly they believe the former President is up to. 49% believe he is using the idea of Canada becoming the 51st state as a negotiation tactic, potentially to gain leverage on trade or policy issues. Another 34% think Trump is serious and genuinely wants Canada to become part of the United States, while 17% assume he is simply joking.

These numbers suggest that while most Canadians do not see him as outright joking, only about one-third interpret his comments as an authentic desire for an actual annexation of Canada. A plurality lands in the middle, sensing a strategic game at play rather than a fully serious proposition. This uncertainty about Trump’s intent sets the stage for how Canadians respond to the broader question of joining the United States.

Openness to Canada Joining the United State: Most remain opposed, but notable pockets are open.

We then posed a more direct question: “Which of the following best describes your view about Canada becoming part of the United States?” We found that 7 in 10 Canadians are absolutely against the idea, but 24% are at least open to exploring it. Only 6% say they absolutely favour Canada becoing part of the United States.

Even with near-universal awareness and a variety of interpretations of Trump’s motives, an outright majority of Canadians is firmly against the idea. However, the one-fifth or so who would at least explore or fully endorse the possibility are noteworthy. This openness, while relatively small as a share of the total population, warrants attention given how out-of-step the concept of annexation would seem in typical Canadian discourse.

Age Differences: Younger Canadians More Open

One of the more striking findings is that younger Canadians (aged 18 to 29) are more receptive to the idea of exploring a union with the U.S. compared to their older counterparts

Among those under 30, 54% are “absolutely against” it, compared to 64% among those 30 to 44 and 80% among those 45 or older.

Meanwhile, more than a quarter (26%) of Canadians aged 18 to 29 say they are “open to exploring” joining the U.S., a noticeably higher proportion than in older groups.

What might explain this generational gap?

Past Abacus Data polling has consistently shown that younger Canadians are more inclined to say they face economic precarities—particularly around housing affordability, job security, and student debt. Some younger people may see closer integration with the United States, or even outright membership, as opening doors to larger job markets, potentially lower housing costs in certain regions, and a more fluid exchange of human capital across the border. Whether these perceptions hold up under scrutiny is another matter, but it helps clarify why younger respondents are more open to at least discussing the idea.

We have also seen in previous research that young Canadians tend to be less attached to traditional national symbols or narratives than older Canadians, possibly making them more open to unusual options—particularly if they see tangible personal benefits. For example, we found that Canadians are far less likely to say they are proud to be Canadian.

Regional and Partisan Differences: Conservative supporters somewhat more open; Quebec most opposed.

When we look at how different regions and partisan communities react, some patterns stand out:

Quebec is the province with the highest proportion of respondents (77%) saying they are “absolutely against” Canada joining the U.S. Historically, Quebec has strongly guarded its cultural and linguistic distinctiveness, and suggestions of further continental integration—much less outright annexation—are likely viewed as threatening to that uniqueness.

Conservative supporters are the most open to exploring the idea (25%) almost twice as likely as Liberal supporters (13%) Nonetheless, a strong majority of Conservatives (58%) remain absolutely against joining the United States.

Perceived Impact of a 25% Tariff on Canadian Goods: Near-unanimous negativity, but varied intensity.

The last major part of the survey focused on the effect a hypothetical 25% tariff on Canadian goods, imposed by a future Trump administration, might have. The results show considerable agreement: 46% believe a 25% tariff would be extremely negative for Canada while 35% view it as quite negative, meaning fully 81% expect detrimental outcomes. Only 3% think the impact would be “quite positive” and 1% “extremely positive.”

Interestingly, a non-trivial 6% believe a 25% tariff would have “no impact,” and 9% say they honestly do not know. While the overwhelming majority sees a tariff as bad news for Canada, the share who say it would be “extremely negative” (46%) is smaller than some might expect, given how dependent Canada’s economy is on trade with the U.S.

This relative tempering of concern could stem from several factors:

  1. Familiarity with Trade Disputes: Canadians have lived through repeated tariff threats and disputes (on steel, aluminium, softwood lumber, dairy) and may have become somewhat accustomed to a recurring cycle of threats and negotiations.
  2. Confidence in Negotiation Outcomes: Some Canadians might believe that, even if a tariff is introduced, it would eventually be lifted or mitigated through renegotiation, limiting long-term damage.
  3. Domestic Resilience: There is also a sense that Canada has diversified trade partnerships, such as CETA with the EU or CPTPP in the Pacific, buffering the full effect of a U.S. tariff.

Regardless, the numbers point to a decisive majority worried about the negative consequences of a hypothetical 25% tariff. As political leaders or interest groups seek to mobilize Canadians around issues of trade policy, they can draw on this widely shared concern—though they should note that the intensity of this concern is not uniform, and a sizeable bloc sees it as damaging but not necessarily catastrophic.

The Upshot

According to Abacus Data CEO David Coletto: ““Canadians overwhelmingly know about Trump’s remarks, and while most of them are firmly against the idea of becoming the 51st state, there is a notable pocket of openness. That more than one in five Canadians (combining those ‘open’ and those ‘in favour’) would even consider it suggests that concerns around economic opportunities, housing affordability, or political alignment in certain segments of the population warrant closer examination. Younger Canadians are particularly noteworthy in that regard, indicating shifting views about borders and national identity among Generation Z and millennials.

Regionally, Quebec is the most strongly opposed—no surprise given the province’s longstanding emphasis on cultural distinctiveness. Partisanship also colours perceptions: Conservatives are somewhat more inclined to consider the possibility, though still a majority would never entertain it. These findings reinforce the notion that identity, economics, and partisan orientation shape how Canadians view both Trump’s remarks and Canada’s relationship with the U.S.

On the trade front, nearly everyone expects damaging impacts if a hefty tariff were imposed on Canadian exports, but the sense of devastation is a bit lower than might be anticipated. This tempered response could reflect a public that has witnessed multiple trade scuffles and trusts in some combination of negotiation, resilience, or diversification to limit the worst outcomes. Yet for policymakers and stakeholders lobbying for strong Canada-U.S. trade relations, these results highlight a high baseline of anxiety they can tap into—recognising that it may take more than warnings of economic chaos to sway Canadians who have grown used to brinkmanship on trade issues.

Ultimately, the data illuminates a crossroads in Canadian public opinion: while the vast majority remain committed to Canada’s sovereignty, a meaningful minority wonders whether deeper ties with the U.S., perhaps extending to union, could help solve pressing economic concerns. The fact that most Canadians believe Trump is not merely joking highlights a continued unease about the unpredictability of American politics. All eyes in Canada will likely be on what happens next week in the U.S.”

Methodology

The survey was conducted with 1,500 Canadian adults from January 9 to January 14, 2025, 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 survey was 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.

Canadian Politics