I'd argue it's hypocrisy if they scream "What about the Children?" and attack "morally degenerate" behavior displayed by the "other side" of the aisle, though, while shrugging off or excusing even worse examples set by their own candidates and officials.I think it's just as likely they have no idea, and this woman's people don't want her voters to know, if they can keep them from knowing.
Also, it's not hypocritical for a politician and their voters to say they care about one thing, but it's a means to an end for something else. That's not hypocrisy, that's lying, self-deception, ect ect.
There's also the matter of hypocrisy from the Right re their imposition of so-called Biblical values in public life, as they fight for the right to discriminate against others at work, at school, in places of business, and even in medical settings, when the folks insisting on this right to refuse service yet don't follow the letter of the law wrt their religion either. This gal springs prominently to mind, but there have been plenty of others in this fight to establish the right to discriminate with religious freedom. A failure to apply those scriptures to their own life when they want to hold everyone else to said scriptures is definitely hypocrisy, and Lauren Boebert, a Christian Nationalist, is definitely guilty of this.
ElaineA's comment sums a lot of what's behind this up. The Right is really about preserving and re-establishing laws and social values where the powerful have near-total social freedom, where everyone else must live in the shadows. But they haven't (yet) come out and said this in so many words (aside from those guys on the internet or at parties who, when drunk, insist there should be different rules and morals for men and women, because biology, or God, or whatever excuse they are using today). Amusingly, Boebert probably wouldn't be electable (let alone forgiven for her public debauchery) in the kind of patriarchy she wants to impose.
Mind you, take anything I say with a grain of salt (a big one) regarding the motives of politically conservative evangelical Christian nationalists. I still can't figure out how people who say they worship the "Prince of Peace" can be so hung up on the right to bear arms, for instance. What would Jesus pack? My inclination is to think that they really don't believe in their religion at all and are cynically using it as a tool, but some of them must believe in all the self contradictory stuff, or it wouldn't be a useful tool to use cynically.