| I hate to say it folks, but let's surrender the Senate race this time around. It will cost untold millions, which we do not have, and strain an already exhausted political party that is trying to rebuild and rebrand itself. And wouldn't it do further damage to the party to put up a weak candidate? We might actually be able to use the argument that this is what you get with a one party state!
Would it be better, and I am asking the question not stating a fact, that instead we should focus on who to replace Ed Markey or Stephen Lynch with? Clearly the race will be won by either Ed Markey or Stephen Lynch, and we MUST have a candidate to enter the race to replace the winner.
Now I know some will say we can never surrender a race. 'It is not the thing to do'. 'It will be a sign of defeat/failure'. But let's face it folks, we do not have a solid candidate to run for the US Senate. For sure, we have a number of good solid candidates to run to replace Markey or Lynch and we should start working on that race now.
It's okay to not put up a candidate for the Senate race. Voters will understand if we frame it properly.
What say you?