Tulsa mayoral candidate who wished all public officials were Christians loses race

Republican Brent VanNorman had the support of Christian Nationalists. The people of Tulsa wanted no piece of that.

This newsletter is free, but it’s only able to sustain itself due to the support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. Would you please consider becoming one of those supporters? You can use the button below to subscribe to Substack or use my usual Patreon page!

---

In a political stunner out of Oklahoma, a Christian Nationalist who was running to become mayor of Tulsa not only lost his race, he lost it to two (!) Democrats (!!) who will now head to a run-off this November.

I posted about the Republican earlier this month, but it is worth another look back at why Brent VanNorman was such a flawed candidate.

Last month, he spoke at the church of fellow Christian Nationalist (and failed U.S. Senate candidate) Jackson Lahmeyer, where he fantasized about going back to a time when all elected officials had to be Christian. The clip was first posted by Right Wing Watch.

… After declaring that “righteousness [also] exalts a city,” VanNorman then cited Proverbs 29 to declare that “when the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice.”

As such, VanNorman then proclaimed, “my number one qualification for being mayor of Tulsa is that I am an unashamed follower of Jesus.”

“I think that if you go back and study the history of our nation and our founding,” he added, “the pulpit was the primary tool [during] the Revolutionary War [for] communicating to people. But [also], public officials had to be Christians in many areas and we’ve gone so far away from that and we need to get back.”

As I wrote before, being a Christian was never a requirement for public office anywhere in the United States. (In some states, there used to be requirements that you had to believe in God, but even those didn’t specify a particular faith.) The Constitution literally spells out how there can be no religious test for candidates. In practice, of course, it has always helped to be Christian and we have a habit of electing Christians and there’s a long tradition of officials taking an oath on the Bible, but none of that was ever mandatory.

Also, if your primary qualification for being mayor is your religious label, you’re admitting you’re not a good candidate. It’s not like a mayor’s job is to preside over church services. The job is to best represent everyone in your community.

Setting aside those facts, though, what the hell did that even mean? What exactly did VanNorman believe “we need to get back” to by electing more Christians? What civil rights did he think needed to be stripped away from various groups? Which Bible did he want injected into public school classrooms? What did he think should happen if there were non-religious officials in public office?

The Tulsa World asked him to explain himself and VanNorman did what all Christian Nationalists do when confronted with their own words: He backtracked.

Brent VanNorman (screenshot via YouTube)

VanNorman clarified his remarks in an interview with the Tulsa World on Monday, saying he was not advocating that the government needs to be Christian.

“No, no, no, no. My point would be that I think people that are informed by Christian values make good public servants and they have a servant’s heart,” VanNorman said. “And so I would hope that, as a result of my value system, in which I care for humanity and … I try to treat people with equality, I try to treat people with love, and there’s a moral foundation that gives me that I hope people would appreciate, and that I hope that my motives are pure in what I’m doing and I’m not doing them for the wrong reason.”

Bull. Shit. There’s nothing unique or interesting about “Christian values” that makes someone more electable. Hell, if we take a look at the voting records of people who have won seats on the basis of those supposed values, there’s no shortage of cruelty, performative nonsense, and MAGA ass-kissing. People who run for office for secular reasons can be excellent public servants regardless of their faith background. The fact that VanNorman looked down upon everyone who didn’t share his mythology was a clear sign to non-Christian voters—and there are many in Tulsa—what he thought of them.

The Tulsa World also noted that during his church speech, he said he believed homelessness was “not primarily a housing issue; it’s a drug addiction issue; it’s a mental health issue.” Which ignored reality. Religion doesn’t put a roof over your head.

VanNorman also said, ironically, that church/state separation was “clearly established law right now”… however those last two words suggested he would love to see that changed.

There was also this exchange between Lahmeyer and VanNorman:

VanNorman’s appearance ended with a pop quiz from Lahmeyer.

“How many genders are there?” Lahmeyer asked VanNorman.

“There are two, and let me give you the scientific definition of a woman, in case you … because there are people that, you know, science is important, right? And they base things on science,” VanNorman said. “Scientific definition of a woman is, it’s an adult with two X chromosomes, period.”

“He’s qualified to be a mayor,” Lahmeyer said. “He knows what a woman is.”

You don’t even have to be a trans rights advocate to know how that definition of woman is wildly oversimplified. There are women without two X chromosomes. There are men who have two X chromosomes. There are women who have hysterectomies and don’t have a uterus. But when you’re dealing with Christian bigots who see the world in black and white, there’s never any room for nuance.

VanNorman’s answer, though, made it very clear that he would make life as miserable as possible for LGBTQ Tulsans. He actually trashed another mayoral candidate for her platform of inclusivity, saying “if she is mayor, throughout the month of June you are going to see some multi-colored flags lining our city streets, and you won’t if I am mayor.”

Shortly after their conversation during a church service, Lahmeyer once again hosted VanNorman at his church and directly urged the congregation to vote for him as mayor—violating IRS regulations—because it would be good to have “someone in that office that is on our team.”

It looks like Tulsa voters got that message—and rejected VanNorman in an otherwise tight race. He placed third, falling to two Democrats, Monroe Nichols and Karen Keith. Since no candidate had 50% of the votes, Nichols and Keith will go to a run-off on November 5.

It was undoubtedly a close race, but the fact that the Democrats split their votes and VanNorman STILL lost tells you just how much Tulsans didn’t want another Republican running their city, much less a Christian extremist.

Nichols, by the way, would be the first Black mayor of Tulsa if elected, a fact that is all the more relevant when you consider the race massacre that occurred a century ago. Keith is the candidate whom VanNorman warned would lead to “multi-colored flags lining our city streets.” Seems like normal people are fine with that.

VanNorman accepted the loss on Tuesday night: “Congratulations to Monroe Nichols and Karen Keith for the job they've done. I wish them the best, but I would love to thank all our volunteers…” That’s a perfectly fine statement, though it’s interesting that he didn’t mention God even once. Nor was there any mention of a social media post he made on Monday in which he cited an unnamed poll that showed how he had “surged against Democrats Karen Keith and Monroe Nichols.” (Even in that poll, he was losing to Keith.)

If you want another indication of what kind of campaign he was running—and who it was meant for—take a look at pictures from the election night watch parties from the top three candidates, courtesy of the Tulsa World. Notice the crowds for the two Democrats… and then VanNorman.

The inclusive candidates came out on top. The religious extremist who parachuted into Oklahoma three years ago, only to think he deserved to be mayor and God supported his mission, lost.

---