Deletion of Jarred Cannon

Comment: Non-winning candidates in party primaries do not get an automatic inclusion freebie under : if a person was not already notable enough for an article for some other reason ''before'' being a candidate in an election, then they have to ''win'' the election (and I mean the ''general'', not just the ''primary'') to get an article ''because'' election per se. Our job is to keep articles about ''officeholders'', not everybody who ever ran and lost. And as for his getting over , all I see here is entirely  coverage not even slightly different from what ''every'' candidate in ''any'' election ''always'' gets: apart from his answers to a strictly pro forma "candidate positions on the issues" questionnaire that the local newspaper gave to every candidate, this is otherwise based ''entirely'' on raw tables of vote totals and candidate lists. This is ''not'' the kind of sourcing that it takes to demonstrate his candidacy as somehow ''special'' compared to every other non-winning candidate in his or any other election. And for added bonus there's a |conflict of interest here, as the article was created by "TheCannon410" — COI isn't a deletion rationale in and of itself, certainly, but it does confirm that the core intent here was self-promotion rather than encyclopedia-building
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL||WP:GNG||WP:ROUTINE||WP:COI)

Comment: per nom. Possibly 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: doesn't meet   as per nom
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)