GRA Derangement Syndrome, Part II: “Team Ossoff” and the Unity Fraud

Mike Collins, Greg Dolezal, Rick Jackson, and the difference between fighting in a primary and helping Democrats afterward. This is Part Two of a three-part series....

This is Part Two of a three-part series. [Read Part One: “They Said Goodbye. The GRA Kept Growing.”]

Republicans are allowed to disagree during primaries.¹

They should.

A primary is when Republican voters examine records, compare candidates, challenge weaknesses, debate principles, and select the people they believe should carry the Republican banner into the general election.

But a party cannot function if “unity” means only that grassroots conservatives must support establishment nominees while establishment figures remain free to undermine grassroots nominees.

The 2026 election presents three useful tests:

Mike Collins, whom the GRA endorsed for U.S. Senate.

Greg Dolezal, whom the GRA endorsed for lieutenant governor.

Rick Jackson, whom the GRA did not endorse for governor, but nevertheless wants people to vote for in November, because he’s a Republican.

Together, the three races expose whether unity is truly a principle, or merely a weapon used against one faction of the Republican Party.

The GRA Endorsed Mike Collins

The Georgia Republican Assembly (GRA) endorsed Mike Collins during the Republican primary process.

When Republican voters selected Collins as the nominee, the GRA supported him against Democrat Jon Ossoff. The organization lists Collins among its 2026 endorsed candidates and celebrated his runoff victory.

That is what Republican unity looks like:

Fight during the primary.

Accept the voters’ decision.

Support the Republican nominee.

Defeat the Democrat.

Some of the GRA’s loudest critics chose a different path.

Shelley Wynter Chooses “Team Ossoff”

Radio host Shelley Wynter did not merely decline to endorse Mike Collins.

He endorsed Jon Ossoff.

Ossoff’s campaign published the announcement under the headline “Conservative 95.5 WSB Radio Host Shelley Wynter: ‘I Am Team Ossoff.’”

Wynter told Ossoff that he was “Team Ossoff” and promised to use his program to help the Democratic senator win reelection. The Ossoff campaign presented the endorsement as evidence of a Republican defection and a blow to Collins’s effort to unite Republican voters.

The endorsement also received national coverage from USA Today and was amplified by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Democrats understood its value immediately.

They did not treat it as a meaningless personal preference.

They treated it as campaign material.

Wynter Attacks the GRA

After the GRA criticized Wynter’s endorsement, Wynter used Facebook to attack the organization:

Read Wynter’s first Facebook response.

Read Wynter’s second Facebook response.

Read the GRA article that prompted the dispute.

The GRA’s criticism was not that anyone possessed a particular genetic trait or immutable characteristic.

The criticism concerned Wynter’s judgment.

The article referenced an earlier incident in which Wynter reportedly praised what a Republican leadership slate “looked like,” rather than emphasizing its members’ accomplishments, qualifications, records, service, or adherence to Republican principles.

Wynter and some of his defenders transformed criticism of identity-based evaluation into criticism of the identities themselves.

Those are not the same thing.

Saying that leaders should be judged by ability and principles rather than genetic traits is not an attack on anyone’s traits.

It is a defense of equal treatment and merit.

Establishment Media Pretends Not to Understand

Wynter was not alone in acting as though the consequences of his endorsement were somehow mysterious.

Voices associated with this Von Haessler segment likewise appeared to treat support for Ossoff as an isolated personal choice rather than conduct with consequences for the entire Republican ticket.

Voters may lawfully and morally vote for whomever they choose.

No political party owns anyone’s vote.

But people presented as alleged political experts should understand what happens when a Democrat wins office.

Either they genuinely do not understand it, which would be astonishing, or they understand it and pretend otherwise because admitting the obvious would expose the hypocrisy of their selective demands for unity.

This is Politics 101.

Electing One Democrat Helps Elect Other Democrats

A Democratic senator does not cast one isolated vote.

He votes for Democratic leadership.

He helps determine which party controls committees.

He votes on judges, executive appointments, spending, regulation, taxes, firearms, abortion, election law, energy policy, and countless other questions.

He gains the institutional power and visibility of incumbency.

That incumbency makes him more attractive to businesses, PACs, lobbyists, political professionals, and interest groups seeking access to a sitting senator.

He can raise money for Democratic committees.

He can campaign for other Democratic candidates.

He can share donor relationships, staff, data, organizing capacity, and credibility.

His victory gives national donors evidence that investing in Georgia Democrats produces results.

That evidence makes it easier for all Democratic candidates elsewhere in Georgia to attract money and institutional support.

Helping one Democrat defeat one Republican does not affect only those two candidates.

It strengthens the Democratic Party.

The Ossoff campaign’s treatment of Wynter’s endorsement proves the point. It used the endorsement to obtain coverage, establish legitimacy, generate volunteer interest, and solicit money.

The DSCC amplified it for the same reason.

Republican disunity can be converted into Democratic fundraising.

Democratic fundraising can be converted into advertisements, staff, organizers, voter contact, turnout operations, and support for other Democrats.

Political commentators who pretend that this connection does not exist are denying the basic mechanics of politics.

Platforming People Has Consequences

This is why Republican organizations should be discerning about whom they elevate.

No one is arguing that Shelley Wynter should be prohibited from speaking, broadcasting, voting, or expressing his opinions.

The issue is institutional judgment.

A political party has limited attention, limited stages, limited credibility, and limited opportunities to introduce people to Republican audiences as trusted voices.

Every person given a Republican platform occupies a place that could have been used to elevate a principled Republican candidate, organizer, volunteer, policy advocate, or grassroots leader committed to helping the Republican ticket.

Wynter was included in a minority-outreach program at the 2023 Georgia Republican Party convention.

He was later selected to emcee a Republican candidate forum before the event was cancelled because of weather. The GRA reported that GAGOP Chairman Josh McKoon had recommended him for that role.

Those appearances helped give him credibility with Republican audiences.

He then used his larger radio platform to endorse a Democrat and promise to help that Democrat defeat the Republican nominee.

Platforming people has consequences.

Instead of repeatedly elevating personalities whose commitment to Republican victories is conditional, the Party could elevate conservative activists who recruit volunteers, raise money, contact voters, defend the Platform, and support the Republican ticket.

Many of those people are members of the GRA.

Deranged Debbie and Mike Collins

Deranged Debbie Dooley presents a related example.²

She spent 2025 promoting “Goodbye GRA,” attacking the organization, and encouraging the narrative that it was collapsing.

She has also used her Substack activity to circulate attacks on Mike Collins and predict that “Ossoff will destroy Collins in the General Election.”

She has said that she will never vote for Collins, that he is “unfit to serve”, and will abstain in the Senate race.

Once again, the point is not that Deranged Dooley is either relevant or credible.

The point is the pattern.

The GRA endorsed Collins and supports him in the general election, along with all other Republicans.

A promoter of “Goodbye GRA” is directing her energy against the Republican nominee.

Yet the public is supposed to believe that the GRA is the problem with Republican unity.

That is GRA Derangement Syndrome.

The GRA Also Endorsed Greg Dolezal

The GRA did not endorse only one successful statewide candidate.

Its members also endorsed State Senator Greg Dolezal for lieutenant governor. The GRA’s published endorsement list identifies Dolezal as its chosen candidate, and the organization later celebrated his victory in the Republican runoff. Dolezal will face Democrat Josh McLaurin in November.

Dolezal’s primary was bitter.

Republicans supporting former Senator John F. Kennedy criticized Dolezal’s judgment, leadership style, campaign advertising, and qualifications. State Senator Drew Echols formally endorsed Kennedy and criticized Dolezal during the runoff. Kennedy and Dolezal also attacked one another’s leadership during their debate.

There is nothing inherently improper about those disagreements.

They occurred during a Republican primary, when Republicans were supposed to compare the candidates.

The relevant question is what happens after the primary.

Dolezal is now the Republican nominee.

The GRA is supporting the candidate its members endorsed.

Republicans who preferred Kennedy are now entitled to decide whether their calls for “unity” were genuine.

I have not found a reliable public source showing that Kennedy, Echols, or another prominent Republican supporter of Kennedy has expressly refused to vote for Dolezal since the runoff. They should not be accused of doing something that has not been documented.

But the standard should be stated clearly:

Republicans were free to attack Dolezal’s record during the primary.

Now they should help him defeat Josh McLaurin.

If prominent Republicans later refuse to support Dolezal, or continue using primary attacks to help his Democratic opponent, the same criticism applied to Wynter and Dooley will apply to them.

Unity cannot mean supporting only the nominees approved by the establishment.

Rick Jackson Clarifies the Entire Argument

The Rick Jackson example must be understood correctly.

The GRA did not endorse Rick Jackson.

The GRA endorsed Burt Jones for governor and strongly criticized Jackson during the primary. Its published materials accused Jackson of presenting himself as a Trump-aligned outsider despite earlier political contributions and relationships that the GRA believed contradicted that image.

Jackson nevertheless defeated Jones and became the Republican nominee for governor. He will face Democrat Keisha Lance Bottoms in November.

That makes Jackson the most important test of the GRA’s unity principle.

Supporting Jackson in the general election does not require pretending that the GRA’s primary criticism never occurred.

It does not require rewriting his record.

It does not mean that GRA members must decide retroactively that he was their preferred candidate.

It means recognizing that the primary is over and that the November choice is now between the Republican nominee and the Democratic nominee.

The GRA’s model is:

Fight honestly during the primary.

Support the Republican ticket afterward.

That’s what’s going on.

Jackson proves that this principle is not merely self-serving. When the GRA and its members apply their general election standard consistently, they support Republican nominee Rick Jackson even though the organization endorsed and preferred Burt Jones.

The more revealing refusal has so far come from the establishment side.

Burt Jones said after the runoff that Jackson needed to reunite the Party. Jones said Jackson’s campaign had not contacted him.

That does not necessarily mean Jones will ultimately oppose Jackson. There is still time for outreach and reconciliation.

But it demonstrates the problem.

Grassroots conservatives are constantly told that they must unite immediately behind establishment nominees.

When an establishment-backed candidate loses, support suddenly becomes conditional.

That is a double standard.

Jackson was not the GRA’s preferred candidate.

He is now the Republican nominee.

The correct general election answer is to support him against Keisha Lance Bottoms while continuing to hold him accountable to the Republican Platform.

That is what unity actually means.

Three Races, One Standard

Mike Collins was endorsed by the GRA.

Greg Dolezal was endorsed by the GRA.

Rick Jackson was not.

The same standard should apply to all three.

Support Collins against Jon Ossoff.

Support Dolezal against Josh McLaurin.

Support Jackson against Keisha Lance Bottoms.

The Republican nominees do not become flawless merely because they won.

They do become the candidates through whom the Republican Platform can and should be enacted and Democratic power can be prevented.

The GRA’s critics insist that the organization is divisive.

But the GRA’s stated general election model supports the entire Republican ticket, not merely candidates who first won a GRA endorsement.

That is why the Jackson example matters.

It demonstrates that true unity is not allegiance to one faction.

It is allegiance to the Republican voters’ final decision.

Who Is Actually Dividing Republicans?

The contrast could hardly be clearer.

The Georgia Republican Assembly fought during the primary and supports its endorsed Republican nominees.

Its general election principle also requires supporting Republican nominees it did not endorse.

Shelley Wynter endorsed a Democrat.

Debbie Dooley has attacked the Republican Senate nominee and said she will not vote for him in the general.

Democratic organizations are amplifying Republican defections to hurt Republican candidates, raise money, and present the Party as divided.

Yet establishment voices appear prepared to blame the GRA, the organization advocating support for the Republican ticket, for possible Republican losses.

That is not merely ironic.

It is absurd.

Unity Requires Action

Republican unity is not a speech delivered at a convention.

It is not a slogan printed beneath a Party logo.

It is not something demanded only from the people who lost an internal contest.

Unity means that when the primary ends, Republicans work to defeat Democrats.

It means recognizing that electing any Democrat makes it easier to elect other Democrats.

It means using Republican stages to elevate people committed to Republican principles and Republican victories.

It means fighting hard before the nomination and fighting together afterward.

Support Mike Collins.

Support Greg Dolezal.

Support Rick Jackson.

Support the Republican ticket.

Hold every nominee accountable to the Republican Platform.

And join the Georgia Republican Assembly.

Next: [GRA Derangement Syndrome, Part III: Don’t Blame the Grassroots for a Weak Party]

1. And only people who will enact the Republican platform (i.e. Republicans) should be on Republican primary ballots.

2. She also, within hours of Part I being published, decided to do it again and randomly attacked various officers of the GRA (who have virtually nothing to do with any endorsement decisions), which proves our point of GRA Derangement Syndrome.