Neither. The correct answer here is to properly inform everyone who has a stake (so the marketing team and the developers who are working on the fix, and probably the QA members who discovered the bug and whoever you as QA lead for this project report to) and get a meeting scheduled ASAP to determine whether the bug is worth delaying the release for. The only delay you as the QA person should be introducing here is preventing the release until a formal go/no-go decision has been made.
In the event that the release is planned to go out with the bug, you should then coordinate with the marketing team to make sure users are properly informed that there is a known issue with the release, ideally including suggestions for workarounds.
In the event that the release is delayed due to the bug, you should then keep in close touch with the development team so that your QA team can start testing any potential fix as soon as it's available and minimize any further delays.
On a side note, the fact that QA rejecting releases will affect your yearly evaluation may or may not be a red flag. If it's a case of having to substantiate why you rejected the release as part of the evaluation, that's a good thing and shows that they hold their employees properly accountable for their responsibilities. If, however, it's an automatic negative on your evaluation, that's a huge red flag, because it means they either don't properly understand what QA is supposed to be about, or that they just don't care about QA, in which case I'd suggest steering clear of that company.
I would suggest if presented with such information that you ask how rejecting a release would impact your performance review, though I would strongly advise doing so after answering their question so that you avoid any impression that their response might impact your answer in some way.