Deletion of Kim A. Myers

Comment: I'm inclined to agree with the delete camp. The individual does not have any notable coverage aside from  regarding their nomination. They come short on , but I would say that the article may be recreated without prejudice should they become elected as outlined in 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE||WP:SIGCOV||WP:POLITICIAN)

Comment: As always, candidates for office do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates — if you cannot make and |reliably source a credible claim that she was ''already'' notable enough for an article for some other reason ''besides'' her candidacy itself, then she must win the election and thereby hold office to get an article because election. But nothing here constitutes a credible claim of notability, as being a local officeholder at the ''county'' level is ''not'' enough in and of itself, and being ranked by pundits as a ''possible'' winner of the seat does not make her candidacy more noteworthy in and of itself than anybody else's — and the volume of reliable source coverage here is ''not'' enough to claim that she passes  in lieu, as the only sources here that are ''substantive'' are purely  ''local'' coverage of her in a ''local'' context. No prejudice against recreation if she wins the seat in November, but nothing here is enough to get her an article today. Wikipedia is not a PR platform for aspiring congresspeople's campaign brochures
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:ROUTINE)