Soon after the discovery of the remains of 215 children at the Kamloops residential school site, we conducted a national survey of 3,000 Canadians with @CRRF and @AFN_Updates.
The results indicate that this event might be a tipping point.
Not only did almost all Canadians hear about it, but it had most people thinking about residential schools and how Indigenous people have been treated in Canada.
How did Canadians react to the discovery? 24% weren't surprised, but for the rest of the country, it was worse than they thought. 1 in 3 said they were "shocked" by the news.
Why shocked? Because most Canadians know little or nothing about the residential school system. Our understanding is quite limited, especially among older Canadians.
A majority of Canadians agree that the residential school policy was "genocide".
So what should we do?
We find broad and deep support for several actions the Federal government could take.
There's also broad understanding that our education systems aren't doing enough to teach students about the history of residential schools.
And that the current approach to teaching history, down plays what really happened.
As a result, 2 in 3 Canadians want their provincial government to increase the amount students learn about the history of residential schools.
Finally, for many Canadians, the discovery in Kamloops has put a focus on Indigenous issues and has changed their views. 49% say they have a new appreciation for the damage residential schools caused Indigenous people.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
As the world gets more precarious, politics is becoming more emotional. The 2025 Canadian election showed how even centre-left leaders can win by borrowing populist strategies—without giving in to fear or division. Here’s how Mark Carney did it:
By the time Mark Carney became Liberal leader, the party had already shifted toward a communitarian, nation-first tone - ie. changes to immigration policy. Trump presented the party with an opportunity.
A precarity mindset emerged and Carney sharpened it—offering a centre-left version of nationalism rooted in shared responsibility, resilience, and calm, competent leadership.
But Carney didn’t avoid emotional tactics. He used alarmist language and framed the election as a fight for Canada’s survival—mirroring the style of populists, while rejecting their divisive content. Nationalism without xenophobia. Urgency without authoritarianism.
🧵On our last survey, we asked people who had voted on the weekend why they voted that way - unprompted and unfilter - here's a summary of what they told us...
🔴Liberal Voters🔴
Among those who voted Liberal, the clearest themes are trust in leadership, fear of the alternative, and a desire for stability in uncertain times. Many supporters said they identify with Liberal values or feel the party best reflects their vision for Canada’s future.
Several respondents mentioned Mark Carney by name, referencing his competence and steady leadership style, particularly in contrast to Pierre Poilievre. Others were more strategic, expressing a desire to stop a Conservative win rather than deep enthusiasm for the Liberals themselves.
Still, a sense of global awareness, experience handling complex challenges, and a focus on progressive policies were mentioned frequently. Many voters signalled that, while not always inspired by the party, they trust it to navigate the current geopolitical and economic climate. Some noted Donald Trump’s return as a factor in choosing stability over disruption. This combination of affinity and aversion—towards Carney and against Poilievre—defined much of the Liberal support.
🔵Conservative Voters🔵
Advance voters who chose the Conservatives were overwhelmingly motivated by a desire for change. Many cited frustration with the current government, particularly on affordability, housing, and leadership. Words like “competence,” “change,” and “control” showed up repeatedly.
For these voters, the election is a referendum on Liberal performance, and Poilievre represents a needed course correction. Some praised his clarity and directness, while others noted support for specific Conservative policies—especially those aimed at economic growth, tax relief, and support for frontline workers.
Others framed their choice as one rooted in common sense and practicality. There was also a significant emotional undercurrent to these responses: anger, disappointment, and impatience with the status quo. While fewer voters mentioned Poilievre by name compared to Liberal references to Carney, when they did, it was often positively—emphasizing his strength, authenticity, and responsiveness to “ordinary Canadians.”
Overall, this group was less focused on national unity or international issues and more driven by domestic priorities and dissatisfaction with Liberal rule.
NEW: What do Americans think about Canada, tariffs, and a possible trade war? Our latest @gzero / @abacusdataca poll finds surprising insights on how our neighbors view the economic relationship. 🇺🇸🇨🇦 🧵⬇️
Canada’s Reputation:
Americans have a positive view of Canada—69% favourable vs. just 8% unfavourable. But when it comes to economic issues, goodwill doesn’t always translate into policy alignment.
Trade & Tariffs:
56% of Americans believe Canada has benefited more from free trade than their country.
But only a minority think Canada is a major source of fentanyl or illegal immigrants
These perceptions are fascinating and important to consider.
🧵Why have the Conservatives gained most and the Liberals lost most among economically progressive/ culturally conservative voters according to the @abacusdataca voter segmentation?
Conservatives have gained momentum among Economic Progressives & Cultural Conservatives because these voters prioritize affordability and social stability.
They support government intervention in healthcare, education, or income support, but feel uneasy about rapid cultural shifts.
Trudeau’s Liberals, in their view, either overreached on social issues and under-delivered on tangible economic relief - it's a perfect storm caused by inflationitis.
Poilievre’s Conservatives tapped into frustrations about rising living costs, rising crime, and the impact of immigration.
By promising lower taxes, supporting traditional values, and critiquing bureaucratic “gatekeepers,” Conservatives appear more in tune with these voters’ desire for strong public programs and cautious cultural evolution, driving a shift in support.
Working on some new #cdnpoli poll analysis that I'm really excited about.
Back in April, I asked Canadians what they thought a Poilievre government would do if elected and what it should do.
I reasked the exact same questions on our most recent @abacusdataca survey...🧵
The results are fascinating.
First, perceptions about what a Poilievre government would or wouldn't do haven't changed much EXCEPT for:
Eliminating the carbon tax (+14)
Making housing more affordable (+9)
Cutting taxes (+6)
Taking climate change seriously (+5)
The fact that axing the carbon tax and housing have most so much is a testiment to the relentless discipline the Conservatives and Poilievre have displayed on those two issues.