This one comes from dKos, apparently Reid says we will not target a Republican running for Senate in Nevada, obviously he’s not running for Reid’s seat. From the story:

I think there’s no way any GOPer in Reid’s position would show him the same sort of courtesy. I feel like we’ve been exposed to this lesson countless time over the past 5 years, so why haven’t we learned it? Mary Landrieu, Max Cleland, etc., etc. Moreover, at most, the GOP will go easy on Reid and Reid alone when he’s up for re-election (which, in any event, isn’t until 2010).

Look, I like the job Reid has been doing - I think he’s held the caucus together pretty well, and he’s certainly been a damn sight better than Tom Daschle. But if he’s looking to save his hide at the expense of giving up a chance to knock off a vulnerable Republican, then I’ve got a problem with that.

I agree with DavidNYC’s points, except that, and perhaps a reader could show me otherwise, I personally believe part of not heavily targeting Nevada may have something to do with the lack of a strong Democratic candidate in NV. Reid with the DSCC has a tough job ahead, trying to defend three open seats and build a larger caucus, I think he’s right to say we can’t squander resources on every race just because the person is weakened, we have to have a strong Democrat challenger to run as well.

Our focus in 2006 is defense and gaining as many seats as we can, and in each instance we need to make sure our candidate is a strong contrast to the Republican nominee, and clean, because ideally we’re going to be pumping lots of nationally raised money into campaigns as they need them. We need to make sure these candidates have a fighting chance, before we invest the kind of time and energy required to win a Senate race. If we were in the majority, I’d be in total agreement with DavidNYC, but we’re not, and we need to pick our battles very carefully.