If independent forces can help portray Rossi as not only the victim of a robbery but a manly spirit, it would do him and the (small d) democratic cause well.
I would wish to politely suggest that all of this can be done while not conceding and continuing the fight, which I believe that he should.
There is a difference in being cast as a 'whiner' when you have no case and are obviously a juvenile, sore loser (Gore 2000) and being someone who has a legitimate case and has been genuinely wronged (Rossi 2004/2005). In Rossi's case he must continue the fight but he must fight just as hard to have his case heard in the public square, something that the local and national press wishes to avoid at all costs. Failing the second part of this fight would be nearly as disastrous as failing the first.
Some here are drawing the inference that the author is suggesting Mr. Rossi should withdraw gracefully now so that he will have a chance at Cantwell's seat in 2006, but he doesn't say that. I would suggest that the point is in not allowing the Left to spin this as sore-losing and whining Republicans now, because WHATEVER candidate opposes Cantwell in 2006 will be tarred by such a brush held over from this election.
If we couldn't send Murray home to Shoreline and her tennis shoes, what makes you believe it matters, in terms of winning and losing, what the 2006 race against Cantwell will look like? If Nethercutt couldn't beat Murray, we are stuck with Cantwell, imo - no matter what happens. Unless, of course, some conservative celebrity runs against her.