Endorsements in local school board elections often reveal more than the speeches themselves. Last week, Congressman Jeff Crank released a video backing three candidates for Academy District 20: incumbent Susan Payne, newcomer Dr. Eddie Waldrep, and Holly Tripp.
On the surface, his message sounded familiar; calls for “respecting parents,” “academic excellence,” and “proven leadership.” But taken together, this endorsement highlights something else entirely: the nationalization of a local school board race. What should be about classrooms, teachers, and students is instead becoming another battleground for Christian nationalist politics.
Jeff Crank’s Role: Importing the National Agenda
Jeff Crank is not a neutral supporter. He is a well-known Christian nationalist political operative, tied to conservative influence campaigns across Colorado. His decision to weigh in on the D20 race sends a clear signal: this slate is part of a larger ideological project, not three independent voices stepping forward to serve their community.
Other school board observers will remember similar patterns. As covered in Payne’s alliance with CPAN and Moms for Liberty, national political groups have repeatedly recruited local candidates as vessels for their agenda. Crank’s endorsement is another link in that chain.
Candidate Framing: Titles and Misrepresentations
The video carefully packages each candidate to maximize appeal:
- Eddie Waldrep is consistently introduced as “Doctor,” a rhetorical flourish meant to project authority. Yet his credibility as an education leader is far from clear, and his background does not erase the fact that his campaign has leaned on culture-war talking points.
- Holly Tripp continues to be described as a teacher, despite lacking a teaching license or degree. As detailed in our previous coverage, her “platform” boils down to book bans, anti-trans policies, and anecdotes about polar bears. That is not the résumé of someone ready to tackle complex district challenges.
- Susan Payne is billed as a leader with “proven” results. But her record tells another story: divisive behavior, support for discriminatory policies, and attacks on parents who raised health and environmental concerns. As our Courageous Decisions analysis made clear, Payne’s votes have led to lawsuits, blocked curriculum, and overlooked student needs.
Proven leadership? The evidence points in the opposite direction.
Language Choices: Buzzwords With a Hidden Agenda
Crank’s endorsement leaned on familiar buzzwords:
- “Respect parents” is often deployed as shorthand for silencing teachers, banning books, and rolling back LGBTQ+ protections.
- “Highest standards of academic excellence” sounds like a call for rigor, but in practice, it is frequently used to mask opposition to equity initiatives or social-emotional learning.
- “Deliver real results” is the vaguest of them all. Neither Payne, Waldrep, nor Tripp has demonstrated concrete outcomes that improve classrooms, address teacher shortages, or reduce class sizes.
It’s the kind of language that feels safe until you compare it to actual policy records. Then it becomes clear these phrases are a cover for a narrow, exclusionary agenda.
What’s Missing: The Real Issues Families Face
Notice what Crank’s endorsement did not mention:
- Funding challenges and per-pupil resources
- Teacher retention and staff morale
- Deferred maintenance and building repairs
- Student mental health and safety
These are the issues raised by parents and educators across District 20. They are also the issues missing from the Payne-Waldrep-Tripp slate. Instead, we hear about lawsuits, bans, and policies designed for national headlines rather than local classrooms.
As the Republican Strategy Forum recap demonstrated, this group’s energy has been invested in culture-war talking points rather than governing the district. Crank’s endorsement reinforces that pattern.
The Bigger Question: Who Benefits?
If Jeff Crank’s video tells us anything, it is that this school board race is no longer just about District 20. It is about providing a platform for national operatives to test messaging, build networks, and claim victories in public education.
The community should ask: Who benefits when Susan Payne, Eddie Waldrep, and Holly Tripp win seats? Parents and students, or the political strategists importing divisive national fights into local schools?
Endorsements are about alignment. By tying herself to Crank, Susan Payne signals once again that her loyalties lie with political allies, not with students or families. Waldrep and Tripp, far from bringing fresh leadership, step into the same mold.
District 20 deserves leadership focused on classrooms, not national politics. When candidates present themselves as champions of “safety” and “excellence” while marching in lockstep with operatives like Jeff Crank, it raises a final, unavoidable question: whose future are they really working for?