Forecast
Where party support stands in the polls today, and where it is heading. Every national poll, averaged and corrected for each pollster's lean, carried forward by a model built on economic fundamentals.
National Forecast
Poll average and forecast
Solid lines are the poll average, corrected for house effects, up to today's line. Dashed lines are the forecast. Shading is the 95% range.
| Party | Polls today | In 3 months | 95% range |
|---|---|---|---|
| LPCLiberal | 47.1% | 45.5% | 38.5–52.8% |
| CPCConservative | 30.7% | 30.9% | 27.4–34.7% |
| NDPNDP | 11.3% | 11.7% | 6.4–16.9% |
| BQBloc Québécois | 6.2% | 6.2% | 4.6–7.8% |
| GPCGreen | 2.1% | 2.4% | 1.0–4.6% |
| PPCPeople's | 1.1% | 1.3% | 1.0–2.7% |
Poll average as of Oct 3, 2026. The forecast starts from the Oct 3, 2026 average and is recalculated weekly.
Win probabilities from the latest forecast snapshot · updated daily
Snapshot: Aug 17, 2025
Recent Polls(2,175 total)
| Firm | Field endⓘ | LPC | CPC | NDP | BQ | GPC | PPC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liaison Strategies | Oct 3, 2026 | 46.0% | 28.0% | 15.0% | 6.0% | 2.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Oct 2, 2026 | 49.1% | 28.2% | 10.9% | 6.3% | 3.4% | 1.6% |
| Liaison Strategies | Sep 26, 2026 | 46.0% | 29.0% | 15.0% | 6.0% | 2.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Sep 25, 2026 | 49.9% | 27.9% | 11.0% | 5.6% | 3.5% | 1.4% |
| Abacus Data | Sep 23, 2026 | 46.0% | 34.0% | 9.0% | 7.0% | 2.0% | 1.0% |
| Liaison Strategies | Sep 19, 2026 | 45.0% | 31.0% | 15.0% | 6.0% | 2.0% | 1.0% |
| Nanos Research | Sep 18, 2026 | 48.1% | 31.0% | 11.2% | 4.8% | 3.3% | 1.0% |
| Liaison Strategies | Sep 12, 2026 | 44.0% | 32.0% | 14.0% | 6.0% | 2.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Sep 11, 2026 | 48.3% | 30.9% | 10.9% | 4.9% | 3.2% | 1.4% |
| Abacus Data | Sep 9, 2026 | 47.0% | 33.0% | 8.0% | 7.0% | 3.0% | 1.0% |
| Angus Reid | Sep 7, 2026 | 46.0% | 32.0% | 12.0% | 5.0% | 2.0% | — |
| Léger | Sep 7, 2026 | 49.0% | 33.0% | 6.0% | 7.0% | 3.0% | — |
| Liaison Strategies | Sep 5, 2026 | 45.0% | 31.0% | 13.0% | 6.0% | 2.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Sep 4, 2026 | 47.3% | 31.3% | 10.8% | 5.0% | 3.4% | 1.6% |
| Liaison Strategies | Aug 29, 2026 | 46.0% | 29.0% | 13.0% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Aug 28, 2026 | 43.7% | 32.6% | 12.0% | 6.0% | 3.9% | 1.4% |
| Ipsos | Aug 27, 2026 | 44.0% | 33.0% | 10.0% | 8.0% | 2.0% | 2.0% |
| Abacus Data | Aug 26, 2026 | 45.0% | 35.0% | 9.0% | 7.0% | 2.0% | 1.0% |
| Liaison Strategies | Aug 22, 2026 | 43.0% | 32.0% | 13.0% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Aug 21, 2026 | 44.1% | 30.0% | 12.9% | 6.6% | 4.0% | 2.0% |
| Liaison Strategies | Aug 15, 2026 | 43.0% | 32.0% | 13.0% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Aug 14, 2026 | 45.7% | 28.5% | 13.7% | 6.2% | 4.0% | 1.5% |
| Abacus Data | Aug 12, 2026 | 42.0% | 35.0% | 10.0% | 8.0% | 4.0% | 2.0% |
| Liaison Strategies | Aug 8, 2026 | 44.0% | 31.0% | 13.0% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Aug 7, 2026 | 45.6% | 29.1% | 12.9% | 6.8% | 4.0% | 1.3% |
| Ekos Research | Aug 4, 2026 | 44.7% | 27.1% | 17.0% | 4.4% | 3.5% | 2.2% |
| Léger | Aug 3, 2026 | 46.0% | 34.0% | 8.0% | 6.0% | 4.0% | — |
| Liaison Strategies | Aug 1, 2026 | 43.0% | 34.0% | 12.0% | 6.0% | 2.0% | 2.0% |
| Nanos Research | Jul 31, 2026 | 47.1% | 27.9% | 12.7% | 6.1% | 3.8% | 1.9% |
| Abacus Data | Jul 29, 2026 | 44.0% | 38.0% | 9.0% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 1.0% |
How the Forecast Works
A plain-English summary of the Trajectory Model and how it produces the projections above.
The core idea
Polls are noisy snapshots of public opinion. The Trajectory Model treats each party's true support as a hidden variable that drifts gradually over time, pulled toward a “fundamental” level set by the economy. This is a Bayesian state-space model (think of it as a Kalman filter with economic covariates and full posterior uncertainty).
Economic fundamentals
The model learns from 20+ years of monthly data how GDP growth, inflation (CPI), unemployment, and time in office historically relate to governing-party support. These coefficients anchor a long-run equilibrium: if the economy improves, the model expects support to drift upward toward that level over time.
Mean-reversion (AR(1))
Support doesn't jump to the fundamental level overnight. A mean-reversion parameter κ controls how quickly it converges, typically over several months. Parties far from their fundamental tend to drift back; those close to it stay put. This dampens extreme poll swings in the forecast.
Valence signal
News sentiment around the governing party — measured daily from Canadian media and smoothed with a 28-day EWMA — enters the Bayesian trajectory model directly as a fitted covariate (γ_valence ≈ 0.05). Favourable coverage nudges the fundamental support level up; negative coverage nudges it down. The effect is modest by design: economic fundamentals dominate over the medium term, and the sentiment coefficient is calibrated from data, not assumed.
Blended forecast
The trajectory model's 3-month projection is blended with the current poll aggregate. At short horizons the polls dominate; at longer horizons the economic model carries more weight. This “blended” estimate is what drives the seat projection and riding win probabilities on the map.
Prediction intervals
The shaded bands on the chart are 95% ranges: for the poll average, the spread of polls in the window; for the forecast, the Bayesian posterior. The p10–p90 intervals in the accuracy tracker are further calibrated using split conformal prediction: interval widths are fit on a held-out historical period and evaluated prospectively, so coverage statistics are out-of-sample.
Implemented in PyMC · trained on Statistics Canada + Bank of Canada economic series · poll aggregate from Polling Canada
Literature: Lewis-Beck (1988), Erikson & Wlezien (2012), Daoust & Dassonneville (2018), Vovk et al. (2005)
How the poll average is calculated
Rolling window. The aggregate combines polls published within a 21-day rolling window. Polls conducted closer to today receive more weight than older ones, following an exponential decay curve with a 14-day half-life. This balances responsiveness to new data against the noise inherent in any single poll.
House effect correction. Each polling firm has a characteristic tendency — a "house effect" — to over- or under-estimate each party's support relative to the final certified result. We estimate these biases from the firm's track record across past elections and subtract them before combining results, so that the aggregate reflects the field and not any single firm's methodology.
Reading the 95% CI. The shaded band around each solid line reflects the spread of polls within the window after house effect correction. A wide interval means pollsters are producing divergent readings; a narrow interval means they are converging. It is not a margin of error for any single poll — it describes how much the aggregate could plausibly shift if the underlying polls moved to the edges of their individual ranges.
Update cadence. The aggregate refreshes automatically as new polls are ingested, typically within hours of publication. The date under the table above is the date the most recent calculation was run.
Pollster house effects
Per-pollster bias corrections applied before the aggregate is computed. Positive = firm historically over-predicts this party; the aggregator subtracts this value. Estimated via James-Stein shrinkage from GE44+GE45 final-week polls vs. certified results.
| Pollster | LPC | CPC | NDP | BQ | GPC | PPC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abacus Data | -0.5 | -0.9 | +1.0 | -0.2 | +0.1 | +0.3 |
| Angus Reid | -0.4 | -0.6 | +0.3 | — | +0.1 | — |
| Ekos Research | -0.2 | -1.2 | +0.5 | -0.4 | +0.4 | +0.7 |
| Forum Research | -0.6 | -0.5 | -0.0 | -0.2 | +0.2 | +0.8 |
| Ipsos | -0.6 | -0.8 | +0.8 | -0.1 | +0.2 | -0.1 |
| Liaison Strategies | -0.2 | -0.4 | +0.2 | -0.1 | +0.0 | +0.1 |
| Léger | -0.3 | -0.5 | +0.4 | -0.1 | +0.1 | +0.3 |
| Mainstreet Research | -0.4 | -0.5 | +0.2 | -0.3 | +0.1 | +0.7 |
| Nanos Research | -0.4 | -0.9 | +0.6 | -0.2 | +0.5 | +0.3 |
Values in pp (percentage points). "—" = insufficient calibration data for this combination.