The number needs
a denominator.
Provincial voting intention among decided and leaning respondents.
A negative assessment of the province is not automatically a vote for one particular opposition party.
More than one view.
The overall pattern was similar across two waves
Reported percentages · common 0–100 scale
PC
Liberal
NDP
Green
February 18 fieldwork versus February 1–2. One-point differences are displayed without implying a statistically established change.
Original reports: Pallas Data · 20 Feb 2025 ↗ / Pallas Data · 5 Feb 2025 ↗
Views of Ontario’s direction
All respondents
This is a different question and denominator from the decided-and-leaning ballot.
Two measures, two different questions
The February 20 release showed a 16-point PC advantage while 57% described the province’s direction negatively. Those are compatible findings. One question concerns the state of Ontario; the other asks respondents to choose among electoral alternatives. Conflating them would turn dissatisfaction into a vote forecast without evidence.
Opposition totals are not transferable votes
The Liberals and NDP had distinct reported shares. Adding them together may describe an arithmetic total, but it does not establish how respondents would behave if a candidate withdrew or a ballot changed. Such a counterfactual needs its own research question or model.
The comparison suggests continuity, not a complete campaign history
The displayed February 5 and February 20 releases showed similar party ordering and shares. Two waves are not proof that nothing happened between them, and a one-point difference is not presented as a verified trend. The source dates and sampling limitations remain part of the interpretation.
The seat question remains separate
A province-wide margin cannot settle which party becomes the Official Opposition. Geographic concentration, local contests and turnout also matter. This report presents the evidence without inventing riding estimates, constituency samples or a retrospective seat model.
The record behind
the report.
Source-reported methods are transcribed below. Items absent from the reviewed summaries are identified so readers can distinguish documented details from information that remains unavailable.
Pallas Data · 20 Feb 2025 · n=953
- Research provider
- Pallas Data
- Source report date
- 20 Feb 2025
- Fieldwork
- 18 Feb 2025
- Population
- Ontario adults aged 18+ eligible to vote provincially
- Total interviews
- 953
- Published ballot base
- Decided and leaning voters; exact unweighted ballot base not provided in the summary
- Interview method
- Automated telephone interviews (IVR), landline and cellphone
- Weighting
- Age, gender and region; 2021 Census
- Source uncertainty statement
- Publisher reports ±3.2 pp at 95% for the full sample; larger for subgroups.
- Commissioning / funding
- Not identified in the reviewed summary; see original release.
- Question wording and order
- Consult the linked original release and its supporting tables. Our question descriptions are summaries, not verbatim questionnaires.
- Design effect / effective n
- Not supplied in the reviewed summary. An effective sample size and bespoke significance test are not calculated here.
Pallas Data · 5 Feb 2025 · n=1,014
- Research provider
- Pallas Data
- Source report date
- 5 Feb 2025
- Fieldwork
- 1 Feb 2025 – 2 Feb 2025
- Population
- Ontario adults aged 18+ eligible to vote provincially
- Total interviews
- 1,014
- Published ballot base
- Decided and leaning voters; exact unweighted ballot base not provided in the summary
- Interview method
- Automated telephone interviews (IVR), landline and cellphone
- Weighting
- Age, gender and region; 2021 Census
- Source uncertainty statement
- Publisher reports ±3.1 pp at 95% for the full sample; higher for subgroups.
- Commissioning / funding
- Not identified in the reviewed summary; see original release.
- Question wording and order
- Consult the linked original release and its supporting tables. Our question descriptions are summaries, not verbatim questionnaires.
- Design effect / effective n
- Not supplied in the reviewed summary. An effective sample size and bespoke significance test are not calculated here.
The earlier Pallas page has an apparent “2005” typo in its methodology paragraph, while its release date and introductory fieldwork description identify February 2025. We retain February 1–2, 2025 from those consistent statements and flag the discrepancy rather than silently reproducing the typo.
Rounded percentages may not sum to 100. Missing categories are not inferred. Point-estimate gaps and arithmetic differences are not significance tests. No respondent-level records, complete weighting files or independent design-effect estimates were available for this analysis.
Inspect the evidence.
- Pallas Data · 20 Feb 2025 ↗Original poll · source date 20 Feb 2025 · fieldwork 18 Feb 2025
- Pallas Data · 5 Feb 2025 ↗Comparison poll · source date 5 Feb 2025 · fieldwork 1 Feb 2025 – 2 Feb 2025
- Official election / referendum information ↗Voting day and jurisdiction
This selected archive reproduces reported numerical findings with attribution and adds Northbound’s interpretation. It is not an original Northbound poll, a complete polling average or a claim that Northbound published before the historical vote. No election outcome was used to generate a survey figure. Publication policy.