Deletion of Chris Fails

Comment: I would argue that it was not |routine. In the United States it is traditional for the party to support the incumbent. The news was not routine as it was highly unusual. I believe this covers it. I will however work on finding better sources. It's my first article so please bare with my neophyteness.  #2
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE||WP:NPOL)

Comment: Fails fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL||WP:GNG)

Comment: doesn't pass  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL||WP:GNG)

Comment: Hollywood Park TX (pop. 3K) is not nearly large enough to guarantee its mayors instant notability per  #2 — he could still clear the bar if he could be really well-sourced as markedly ''more'' notable than most other smalltown mayors, but he's not automatically entitled to have an article just because he exists. Unsuccessfully challenging an incumbent congresscritter in a party primary is also not grounds for an article, either — a person has to ''win'' the ''general'' election, and thereby actually become an actual congressperson, to collect notability from the congressional election process. And the referencing here consists entirely of |primary sources and |routine coverage of the primary process, with ''no'' coverage being shown to demonstrate any potential notability ''as a mayor'' — which means there's no basis to claim that he passes  either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:ROUTINE||WP:GNG)

Comment: as Chris Fails to meet  or , with only routine coverage in secondary sources and insufficiently high office to merit a presumption of notability. Additionally, note that other editors have repeatedly asked about the apparent COI issue, with no response
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NPOL)