Elections Canada has the numbers.
Blogosphere giant Captain's Quarters has been covering the election too.
(Hat Tip to Real Clear Politics for those three links.)
Reuters always has a way of casting a negative light, in its headline. But that's to be expected of a news organization that refuses to call terrorists what they are, terrorists. Instead of saying something like "Conservatives win narrow victory" or "Conservatives Edge Liberals", they choose to cast seeds of doubt, at the very outset because they didn't particularly like the results.
But beyond all of the partisan punditry that will fill the airwaves today, there are a couple of points to note that should not go unnoticed.
First of all, it's not a mandate. It's not even a majority.
Like the U.S. elections in 2004 and the German elections of last year, there are still some very bitter divisions remaining here in the U.S., in Germany, and as we now see, in Canada. While American elections were a slight majority for Bush and the GOP, Merkel did not win a majority, in fact, after it was determined that her party could not form a government with the other conservative party, she was forced to form a coalition with rival socialists. That seriously watered down her potency as the new Prime Minister. The same principle applies to the new Canadian Prime Minister.
But the most important point to note is, although the tables were not completely turned on the Liberals, the momentum gained by the left in the 90s has stalled out and even started teetering back to the right, just enough to show some signs of encouragement. Balance is the key here. And while I tend to be more conservative on national security issues than other moderates, and while I voted for Bush over John Kerry (for that very reason), I still like to see checks and balances. Even conservatives, when left in power too long, have the potential to become corrupt, lazy, and inefficient.