In the lead-up to most elections, pollsters and pundits usually have a good idea of what is most likely to happen.
We rely on signals beyond the popular vote race to form our assessments — signals like historical precedent, the mood of the electorate, economic performance, incumbency, inertia, and the desire for change.
If these all point in the same direction and are reinforced by popular vote polling, the election is generally easier to call. The recent Ontario election is a good example of this: beyond the double-digit lead for the Progressive Conservatives in the polls at the outset of the campaign, 46 per cent believed the Ford government deserved re-election, 57 per cent approved of Doug Ford’s performance as premier, and Ford was named as best to lead on all the issues that mattered most, including Trump and the economy.
However, if the signals point in opposite directions, an election outcome becomes more difficult to forecast.
The 2025 Canadian federal election is shaping up to be an election of mixed signals.
The recent U.S. election was a similar situation. Polling slightly favoured the Democrats, but the Republicans performed better than some expected, as many signals beyond the horse race pointed in their direction.
Most notably, the economy was the top issue in the U.S. campaign, and Ipsos polling showed that Donald Trump had a significant lead over Kamala Harris on this issue. Moreover, the Biden administration’s approval rating was below 40 per cent, which pointed to a Trump advantage.
History doesn’t provide many parallels to Canada’s current situation: a successor (not an incumbent) unelected prime minister seeking election for a party that’s been in power for 10 years, facing a potential trade war with the United States. Kim Campbell, as a successor to Brian Mulroney, suffered a significant defeat in 1993; Kathleen Wynne, as a successor to Dalton McGuinty, won a majority government. Neither had to contend with Donald Trump.
And the mood of Canadians is volatile. Just two months ago, the Conservatives opened a 26-point lead over the Liberals in national polling, and they held a substantial lead for more than a year; now, the Liberals have a six-point lead over the Conservatives.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.
Moreover, national support for the NDP has collapsed, and the Bloc is on their back foot in Quebec. Public opinion rarely shifts so drastically and quickly. Canadians are clearly exploring their options, and it’s likely that the vote will remain volatile throughout the campaign.
The mood is also decidedly negative. Ipsos polling has shown that Canadians believe the country is increasingly on the wrong track. Economic confidence is as low as it has been since the Great Recession, with even worse expectations for the next six months given tariffs. Financial health has not improved, despite inflation and interest rates coming down. While patriotism may be on the rise as Canadians rally around the flag, social cohesion has deteriorated over the last two years as people fight for a smaller piece of a shrinking pie.
All these signals would normally point to a change in government. Under such economic circumstances, pocketbook issues would typically dominate an election, advantaging the Conservatives. However, Trump and tariffs are likely to be equally important to Canadians, with recent Ipsos polling showing that Prime Minister Carney has the advantage on this issue. Once again, mixed signals.
Perhaps the most significant signal used to predict an election outcome is the desire for change. If there’s a strong desire for change, it’s the challenger’s election to lose; if it’s a “continuity” election, the incumbent is highly favoured.
In December 2024, only 23 per cent thought the Liberal government under Justin Trudeau deserved re-election, while 77 per cent wanted change — a historically high figure. However, as of March, while 58 per cent want change, 42 per cent desire continuity under Mark Carney, which is enough to deliver a majority government.
In our multi-party system, capturing 40 per cent or more of the national vote generally translates into winning a majority of the seats in the House of Commons, despite not earning a majority of the votes cast.
What remains to be seen is whether Carney represents the kind of change that Canadians desire. The collapse of the “time for a change” metric isn’t because Canadians don’t want change. They just feel that Prime Minister Carney might represent enough change from the old regime without changing parties.
Channeling the electorate’s grumpy mood won’t be enough for the Tories to ride the winds of change. Those winds have now softened to a gentle breeze.
As the campaign progresses, these signals may align and paint a clearer picture of the most likely outcome. But given the current mix, this election could easily go either way.
Sean Simpson is senior vice-president of Ipsos Public Affairs in Canada.