Happens all the time. A 'nuts and bolts' type of candidate loses out to one who is more 'flash.' Women make that choice all the time. Oliver North won the Senate primary over a hard working budget director in the Reagan administration(Miller?). Ralph Reed has earned his right to run for the office. It's like an actor getting a bug up his behind and choosing to run. Think of the times when Republicans had to turn to these types of people as their only opportunity: Think Mike Ditka and Ahnold.
Ditka may have actually been a promising candidate for us, legitimately Conservative, and viable as an Illinois resident.
As for Ah-nold, I never fell for his schtick once. I knew he was a destructive RINO before he ever declared for office.
I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing to run a "flashy" candidate if in most areas they are superior to a candidate whom has been toiling in the field, so to speak. In the case of Reed, it's not necessary to run him. Cagle is quite acceptable and carries none of Reed's baggage.
I forgot to comment on Jim Miller. I was always torn over that contest back in '94. When we were in the minority, a candidate like North would've been precisely the kind of person that would've been fun to see in action on the Senate floor, but at the time, I didn't support him because I thought he was too damaged to win (I proved right). Miller might very well have defeated Chuck Robb in that contest. Ironically, Miller being the choice of the establishment, became the choice of the Northites 2 years later when they tried to bring down John Warner, and the Warnerites (whom had been big Miller boosters in '94), carved Miller up to pieces during the primary challenge.
Ideally, I would've preferred to see Miller and Allen in the Senate today.