Follow-up on "Is there trouble looming for Teague?"

Several readers have responded to my suggestion that progressive Democrats have no business protesting Congressman Harry Teague's moderate voting positions, since they failed to mount a credible primary challenger to the first-term Democrat.

Most of these responses argue that my point is either invalid or disingenuous, or both, since, in 2008, Teague did not have the power of incumbency, which gave McCamley a far better shot of defeating him than would be the case today, with Teague being both well-financed by the national Democratic Party and a House incumbent.

A simple example, however, illustrates the limitations of this objection. In Arkansas, incumbent Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln faces a stiff primary run-off challenge from Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter. While Lincoln received the most votes in initial primary balloting on May 18, Halter kept the incumbent under the critical 50% mark, forcing a run-off on June 8. With President Obama, Vice-President Biden, former President Clinton, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (Senate arm of the Democratic National Committee) firmly in Lincoln's corner, Halter faced at least as much, if not more, of a disadvantage in waging his insurgent primary bid to unseat Lincoln as a progressive Democrat would have faced in trying to take down Teague in New Mexico's primary on June 1.

So, I throw the ball back in progressives' court. Where was the challenger?