This Richmond Times-Dispatch piece by Jeff Schapiro offers good and bad news about the race (
http://www.timesdispatch.com/...).
Allen's presidential prospects have been damaged, perhaps fatally. He's now running neck and neck with Webb, and - in Larry Sabato's opinion at least - has his own image problem.
The bad news is that Webb remains poorly known, poorly funded, off the airwaves and is sometimes depicted as aloof.
He hasn't hit out on the macaca issue, though I suspect that may - in fact - be the most prudent move on his part. At this point he has to introduce himself. I was chatting up my repairman who hasn't followed the race and the guy was just set on the notion that Allen is good people, without any read on Webb. That's gotta change (insofar as my repairman is the archetypal swing voter)
In the meantime Allen has settled into an anti-intellectualism that's contemptible - even for him, belittling Webb as a novelist. A campaign appearance with fellow authors Stephen King and John Grisham has brought even more of this nonsense from the Allen camp (as though "Carrie" or "The Firm" were written for the Booker Prize set). I'm not sure belitting the favorite authors of tens of millions of regular Americans is the smoothest move. I frankly look forward to the part in the debate where Webb invites Allen to read "Fields of Fire" - since Allen was conveniently elsewhere during Vietnam.
For his part, Webb could do a bit to dispel the image of him as aloof - this is the kind of thing that the media loves to say about a candidate. A recent piece by Michelle Cottle (who is a quick-witted, observant writer, no matter what you think of the publication) highlights this image problem: (http://www.tnr.com/...). I haven't seen him yet myself, but the perception is out there - in the RTD article as well.
One aside - the article notes that Sabato has known Allen for 35 years. Granted they're both UVA products, but raised eyebrows anyone?
See also: (http://www.dailypress.com/...)