; and (C) the residents of that district who are not the members of the protected class usually vote sufficiently as a bloc to enable them to defeat the preferred candidates of the members of the protected class. (2) Upon a plaintiff establishing the required threshold showing under paragraph (1), a court shall conduct a totality of the circumstances analysis with respect to a claim of vote dilution to determine whether there was a violation of subsection (a), which shall include the following factors: (A) The extent of any history of official voting discrimination in the State or political subdivision that affected the right of members of the protected class to register, to vote, or otherwise to participate in the political process. (B) The extent to which voting in the elections of the State or political subdivision is racially polarized. (C) The extent to which the State or political subdivision has used voting practices or procedures that tend to enhance the opportunity for discrimination against the members of the protected class, such as unusually large election districts, majority vote requirements, anti-single shot provisions, or other qualifications, prerequisites, standards, practices, or procedures that may enhance the opportunity for discrimination against the members of the protected class. (D) If there is a candidate slating process, whether the members of the protected class have been denied access to that process. (E) The extent to which members of the protected class in the State or political subdivision bear the effects of discrimination, both public or private, in such areas as education, employment, health, housing, and transportation, which hinder their ability to participate effectively in the political process. (F) Whether political campaigns have been characterized by overt or subtle racial appeals. (G) The extent to which members of the protected class have been elected to public office in the jurisdiction. (3) In conducting a totality of the circumstances analysis under paragraph (2), a