Jon Ossoff and Mike Collins Locked in Dead Heat—But the Poll Numbers Are Hiding Something Sinister
The political establishment wants you to believe that the race between Senator Jon Ossoff and Representative Mike Collins is a straightforward toss-up. A new poll from the University of Georgia’s School of Public and International Affairs shows Ossoff leading Collins by just two points—46% to 44%—within the margin of error. The mainstream media will spin this as a “competitive race,” a “battle for the soul of Georgia,” and a “referendum on Biden’s agenda.” But if you scratch the surface, you’ll find the numbers are a carefully curated illusion designed to distract you from the real story: a hidden war between the Deep State and the grassroots, with the voting machines as the battlefield.
Let’s start with the obvious. The poll, conducted between October 12 and October 18, sampled 1,024 likely voters. But who exactly are these “likely voters”? The polling firm used a mix of landline, cell phone, and online responses—a classic recipe for manipulating the sample. Landlines skew older, more rural, and more conservative. Cell phones skew younger, more urban, and more progressive. Online responses are a wildcard, easily gamed by bots and motivated actors. So what did they do? They weighted the results to match a “likely voter model” that conveniently overestimates Democratic turnout. Sound familiar? It’s the same playbook used in 2020 and 2022, when polls in Georgia consistently showed Democratic candidates ahead, only for Republicans to close the gap on Election Day—or win outright, as we saw with Brian Kemp’s 2022 landslide.
But the real conspiracy here isn’t just about polling methodology. It’s about who is funding the narrative. Look at the University of Georgia’s polling arm. Who are their donors? A quick dive into public records reveals contributions from the left-leaning Democracy Fund and the Rockefeller Family Fund—both major players in the “election integrity” industry that ironically works to suppress skepticism about electronic voting systems. These same organizations funded the “audits” in Georgia after 2020 that rubber-stamped the Dominion machines, despite mounting evidence of anomalies. So when this poll tells you Ossoff has a microscopic lead, ask yourself: is it a prediction, or is it a goalpost?
Now let’s talk about the candidates themselves. Jon Ossoff is a darling of the Washington establishment. He’s the youngest sitting senator, a former film producer and national security aide who has never held a real job outside of politics or consulting. He’s backed by the same corporate PACs that fund both parties—Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and defense contractors who profit from endless war. Collins, on the other hand, is a firebrand from the 10th District, a businessman who owns a trucking company and has been a thorn in the side of the GOP establishment. He voted against Kevin McCarthy for Speaker, he’s called out the FBI’s weaponization, and he’s openly skeptical of the COVID narrative. The establishment hates him, which is exactly why they’re pouring millions into this race to prop up Ossoff.
But here’s the part they don’t want you to know: the poll numbers are actually worse for Ossoff than they appear. The survey oversampled urban counties like Fulton and DeKalb by 15% compared to actual voter turnout in 2022. In reality, the rural and exurban counties—where Collins crushes Ossoff by 30-point margins—are underrepresented. When you adjust for geography, Collins is likely up by 4 to 5 points. The only reason Ossoff is even close is because of a massive influx of out-of-state money from groups like the Senate Majority PAC, which is funded by George Soros’s Open Society Foundations. They’re running ads painting Collins as “extreme” while conveniently ignoring Ossoff’s vote to fund Ukraine’s war machine and his silence on the border crisis.
And what about the elephant in the room—election integrity? Georgia’s new voting machines, the Dominion ImageCast X, were at the center of the 2020 controversy. After the 2021 audit, the state legislature passed SB 202, which tightened voter ID requirements and banned drop boxes in most counties. But the machines themselves remain unverified. A 2023 report from the Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) actually admitted that these systems have “critical vulnerabilities” that could allow a bad actor to flip votes. Yet the mainstream media buried the story. Why? Because if voting machines are compromised, the entire 2024 election is a farce. And the powers that be cannot afford for you to know that.
So what does this mean for Ossoff vs. Collins? If the election is fair, Collins wins by 3 to 5 points. If the machines are manipulated, Ossoff ekes out a victory, and the media declares it a “mandate.” But the real question is: will the people stand for it? The grassroots are already mobilizing. Groups like the Georgia Election Integrity Network and the VoterGA coalition are planning to deploy thousands of poll watchers. Collins himself has called for a hand-count audit in every precinct. Meanwhile, Ossoff is refusing to commit to a post-election audit. Why? Because he knows the margin of victory will be suspicious.
Look at the historical pattern. In 2020, Ossoff beat David Perdue by 0.8%—less than 55,000 votes out of 5 million cast. The margin was so narrow that a full recount was triggered, but it was done on the same machines. In 2022, Raphael Warnock beat Herschel Walker by 2.8% in a runoff, but the turnout dropped by 1.2 million voters compared to the general election. Coincidence? Or a feature of a system designed to flip close races?
The establishment wants you to believe that the only question is “who will win.” But that’s a trap. The real question is: “who will allow the win?” The Deep State has invested billions in keeping the
Final Thoughts
Based on the polling data emerging from Georgia, the most telling signal isn't just the margin between Ossoff and Collins, but the fundamental structural weakness it exposes for the GOP in a runoff. Collins is running a race defined by the national brand and base turnout, while Ossoff’s campaign is proving that a disciplined, suburban-focused coalition can be built without relying on the top of the ticket. My takeaway is that if Collins can’t break 50 percent against a candidate who was painted as a carpetbagger, the Republican playbook in the suburbs is broken, and Ossoff has the momentum to finish the job.