Deletion of Virginia gubernatorial election, 2013

Comment: as  violation.  Like Everyking, presuming there's some published speculation about candidates and such, an article on such would meet .  Fine and dandy; ''except there isn't.''  We shouldn't be advocating Keep based on information that hasn't been supplied and that research doesn't turn up
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:V)

Comment: It's not really  if there are citations and the event is certain to happen |("Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place... Examples of appropriate topics include the 2010 U.S. Senate elections and 2016 Summer Olympics.")  The available sources I found, however,http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/local/article/DECA31_20091230-221607/314574/http://www2.wsls.com/sls/news/local/govt_politics/article/gop_ticket_for_2009_nearly_locked_in/7768/, are pretty weak, but would improve the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: Even though it technically is exempt from , it is way too distant into the future to be an article that isn't relying on a lot of predictions and guesses. This article will be in such a constant state of change that it will almost be news and not an article. There has to be limits about how far into the future we speculate on events
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: In 2013, yes.  Today, it is a case of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)