Yet Matt Shea has been elected (and supposedly re-elected), supposedly through the support of GOP voters, despite his hypocrisy (being against divorce while being divorced), reports of physical abuse against his ex-wife, pulling a gun on another motorist and has held anti-gay policies for many years. So even before the latest reports of nuttery, it was obvious that Shea was a problem. Yet GOP voters kept voting for him, and the party leadership seemed to have no problem with him.
If it were just some fringe GOP follower with no political power who was expressing bigoted views it would be fair to dismiss them as not representative of the party as a whole. But it becomes harder to dismiss the actions of that "one person in that group" when they happen to be an individual with actual political power, who has regularly been re-elected despite some rather distasteful history.
It should also be noted that republican support for Trump as a whole remains high, despite the fact that he called neo-nazis "fine people" and locked children in cages. I find it difficult to believe that people would both approve of the racism of Trump yet somehow think Shea has overstepped the line.
Define "Plenty" of GOP members. Are those that reject his racism in the majority? A significant minority? Evenly split?
Trump has ~80-90% approval ratings among Republicans. Does that mean that the 20% minority who disapprove of him constitute "plenty" of GOP members?