I have no idea how the debate unfolded in Virginia since I didn't pay attention to it. The article made the point that the dems campaign dismissed the uproar on the basis of incorrect language usage. That seemed to be an error.
To put it bluntly, so ****ing what that the stuff they're talking about doesn't fit the academic definition of the theory in law schools in the 70s.
The whole point was not to ignore the "stuff"
Beyond that...
I think it's both. Yes, people like Tucker and similar media outlets will play it up for all its worth like any other topic they can find useful.
However, there has been woke nonsense -- or, charitably, debatable stuff - that has made its way into the classroom. (and society at large)
Various non progressive media would track these sort of "woke" movements into the classroom. Fox and Tucker and other would regularly share stories. On twitter you can find feeds that are dedicated to reporting on these sort of stories. I guess I could go find them for you. You won't find them in the Washington Post or NYT or on NPR or whatever.
All of that, apparently, was dumped under the umbrella term CRT over the summer. From there, of course, CRT became a buzzword and something that could be more easily marketed. Plus, it gave a name to the problem of woke incursion into education.