A top target for the GOP will be Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, who was re-elected Senate majority leader earlier this week. It’s good to be the king, except for the large target on your back that comes with the territory. In 2010, expect Reid to be one of the Democrats’ most vulnerable incumbents.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid campaigns for Barack Obama in early November. Reid is banking on the voter registration edge enjoyed by Nevada Democrats to propel him to re-election in 2010. (Getty Images)

Felling opposition party leaders offers a sweeter victory than just picking up a seat in congress. In 2004, Republicans couldn’t hide their excitement over defeating Sen. Tom Daschle, who served as both majority and minority leader depending on the Democratic party’s fortunes year to year. Democrats targeted Republican minority leader Mitch McConnell this year, but were ultimately unsuccessful at poaching the Kentucky senator’s seat. Reid will be just the latest target.

Las Vegas Sun political columnist Jon Ralston anticipates Reid’s re-election campaign “will be the most expensive, most watched and most vitriolic contest in state history.” Ralston argues team Reid “plays politics like a UFC match without rules,” and notes that “Reid Fatigue” could keep the senator from landing a fifth term.

A frequent target of Republicans, Reid has never been terribly popular. Reid had his best showing in his most recent campaign, winning 61 percent of the vote against challenger Richard Ziser, a poorly-financed Evangelical Christian not in sync with the more live and let live attitude of Nevada Republicans on social issues, in 2004. But his previous campaigns were all squeakers. In his closest match-up, Reid beat John Ensign (who would win Nevada’s open Senate seat two years later) by 400 votes in 1998.

Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki has stopped just short of throwing his hat in the ring, but called Reid “too liberal and too partisan for Nevada.” (National Journal ranked Reid 9th most liberal senator based on his 2007 voting record.) But in an editorial, the Las Vegas Review-Journal points to Reid’s handling of Sen. Joe Lieberman following the Democrat-turned-independent’s backing of Sen. John McCain for president as a sign that “Give ‘Em Hell Harry” can work the middle:

With the far-left wing of the Democratic Party still demanding a pound of flesh, Sen. Reid stuck by his word… Sen. Reid’s willingness to stand up to the yowling of unreasonable followers marks an encouraging start to his second go-round as Senate leader. We hope he can rein in what promises to be cornucopia of liberal legislation and look out for the interests of Nevada and its battered economy… He’ll need to display the kind of leadership he provided Tuesday if he expects Nevada voters to return him to office in 2010.

Ensign, who is plotting the state GOP’s comeback, said Rep. Jon Porter, who lost his bid for re-election to Dina Titus on November 4, is also a viable candidate. Ensign noted that losing a race today is no barrier to victory tomorrow in Nevada. Ensign won his seat in 2000 after losing to Reid two years earlier, and Titus beat Porter after losing her bid for governor in 2006. But with a gubernatorial election also on tap for 2010, RealClearPolitics reports that “top Republican challengers may have to be talked out of running for governor.”

The freshman members of congress — especially those whose districts switched party loyalty — will also be targets come 2010.

Among the most vulnerable freshman is Betsy Markey from Colorado’s 4th district. Observers continue to question whether Markey won or incumbent Marilyn Musgrave lost. Despite a double-digit loss, Musgrave — a social conservative who views gay marriage as a top concern — has yet to concede. The 4th district had been in Republican hands since 1973, and registered Republicans outnumber Democrats 168,689 to 123,281 (unaffiliated voters account for 154,516).

A number of potential challengers have already emerged, and Markey continues to portray herself as a moderate in the still conservative-leaning district. Rep. John Salazar has invited Markey to join the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of fiscally conservative Democrats, telling the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel “she’s a very moderate to conservative Democrat… [who would] make a great Blue Dog.”

Markey, a former aide to Salazar’s brother Sen. Ken Salazar, has so far demurred, but has made it known she won’t just follow the Obama administration blindly. “I may have an issue with some of [the] policies that come from this administration,” Markey told PolitickerCO.com. “If I don’t agree then I will vote against it.”

Barack Obama takes the stage Tuesday at the University of Nevada, Reno (AP)

Today’s Los Angeles Times looked at the Democratic party’s surge in registrations in Nevada, with 43 percent of registered voters to the Republicans 37 percent (compared with 2004 when Republicans had the slightest of edges with 40.5 percent versus the Dems 40.1 percent) and concluded “there may be no better test of Obama’s campaign strategy than here in Nevada.”

“The Obama campaign believes that by turning out thousands of newly registered younger and Latino voters… they can capture the Silver State’s five electoral votes,” writes Dan Hoyle in Salon.com. But getting newly registered voters to turn out is often easier said than done.

“Democrats love to tout voter registration numbers, but that’s putting the cart before the horse,” McCain spokesman Rick Gorka said in Salon.

Nevada Democrats’ “secret weapon” may be out of state volunteers who help register new voters, canvas neighborhoods to convince undecideds, and are expected to get people to the polls come election day, writes Hoyle. Alise Moss, a healthcare consultant from Sparks, Nevada, told Hoyle, “We love those crazy Californians,” and estimated up to 400 have stormed town on any given weekend.

“While registering and contacting voters here in California is a great way to be active, the reality is that California is not a contested state,” Los Angeles City Council President Eric Garcetti wrote to his supporters last week, urging them “to travel to help walk precincts and work with voters in that swing state [Nevada].”

In their “Drive for Change” push, the Obama campaign is also reaching out to California voters looking to make a difference. “Nevada is a crucial battleground in the race for the Presidency, and Barack needs support not just from all Nevadans, but also from Nevada’s neighbors — especially California. This is the chance for Californians to have a major impact on this historic race,” reads the plea on Obama’s website.

McCain cancelled a stop in Reno scheduled for Thursday, leaving some Republicans worried he’s not paying enough attention to Northern Nevada and risks losing Washoe County. “You cannot win statewide as a Republican without winning Washoe County,” Republican strategist Robert Uithoven told the Reno Gazette-Journal.

Obama is in Washoe County today speaking at the University of Nevada, Reno. The Illinois senator was planning on speaking about healthcare, but instead will focus on the economy. Likely to go over well in Nevada is a gambling metaphor recently added to Obama’s stump speech and last heard yesterday in neighboring swing state, Colorado.

“I read the other day that Sen. McCain likes to gamble. He likes to roll those dice. And that’s OK. I enjoy a little friendly game of poker myself every now and then,” Obama said. “But one thing I know is this — we can’t afford to gamble on four more years of the same disastrous economic policies we’ve had for the last eight.”

Check out liveblogging of the UNR speech by the campus paper the Nevada Sagebrush.

Bailout Voting Out West

Politicker’s James Pindell reports that incumbents in tight races overwhelmingly voted against the bailout.

There are 41 incumbent House members on Politicker.com’s The Pindell Report of the nation’s most competitive House races. Of that group 31 voted against the bailout, possibly proof that that a yes vote might be politically toxic just a little over a month from Election Day. Of the four House members running for the Senate only Maine’s Tom Allen voted for in favor.

The three congressmen running for senate that voted against the bailout hail from Battle for the West states — New Mexico’s Steve Pearce and Tom Udall and Colorado’s Mark Udall. Mark Udall’s opponent, former Rep. Bob Schaffer, also has spoken out against the bailout.

Nevada Rep. Jon Porter was the only incumbent in a tight race in the West to vote for the bailout.

The votes and comments of your Battle for the West reps:

Diana DeGette(D-CO-1), Yea: “Despite my hesitations, I supported this bill — not because I wanted to, not because it was the politically easy thing to do, but because it was the right thing to do.”

Mark Udall(D-CO-2), Nay: “The cost of this bailout was too high and the return far too uncertain for the American families who were being asked to bear the burden.”

John Salazar(D-CO-3), Nay: “Rather than adopting this bill, Congress should remain in Washington as long as it takes to craft legislation that restores confidence in the markets and helps Main Street, but doesn’t leave the American taxpayer holding the bag for the excesses of an out-of-control Wall Street.”

Marilyn Musgrave(R-CO-4), Nay: “Today I voted against a piece of legislation that was fatally flawed from the beginning. This bill was too hastily assembled and had taxpayers paying far too high a price.”

Doug Lamborn(R-CO-5), Nay: “I believe our economy will come back, stronger and better even when it hits obstacles. The key is to allow the markets to work themselves out, not be bailed out.

Tom Tancredo(R-CO-6), Yea: “I made the decision because I fear the folks who did everything the right way – those who paid their bills and lived within their means – would pay the price for the excesses of others. A careless smoker who starts a fire in his house may deserve to suffer the consequences.  We could refuse to call the fire department and take solace in the fact that the careless smoker will lose everything – but if we do not act, the embers from the fire caused by his irresponsibility may land on homes throughout the neighborhood.  In order to save our homes, we must put water on the fire started by the careless smoker.

Ed Perlmutter(D-CO-7), Yea: “My vote was important to show a bipartisan effort to stabilize our markets and help those on Main Street in these hard economic times.”

Shelley Berkley(D-NV-1), Nay: “We must produce as good a piece of legislation as possible, even in a tight time frame…If we have to come back in October to do a better job for Main Street and reform Wall Street, then so be it.”

Dean Heller(R-NV-2), Nay: “I cannot with good conscience put Nevada’s taxpayers on the hook for the foolish excesses of Wall Street.”

Jon Porter(R-NV-3), Yea: “I don’t trust Washington and I certainly don’t trust Wall Street, but I do trust that we must take immediate and decisive steps to correct our financial markets and the time is now. I voted yes today because when I go to sleep at night, I need to know that I have taken every action possible to protect America from further collapse.”

Heather Wilson(R-NM-1), Yea: “I felt it was important for Congress to act to stabilize our financial markets. Today’s bill was a ‘workout,’ not a ‘bail out,’ and had protections for taxpayers and homeowners. The bill would have given needed liquidity to the financial industry and let taxpayers share in the profits as mortgage markets recover.”

Steve Pearce(R-NM-2), Nay: “I strongly disapprove of putting taxpayers on the hook in order to bailout the Wall Street firms that got us in to this crisis. Those who made risky decisions should own up to them.”

Tom Udall(D-NM-3), Nay: “Today’s legislation provides too much to corporate executives, too little to homeowners, and nothing to ensure that Wall Street cannot repeat the mistakes that got us into this crisis.”

See a complete state by state voting breakdown here.