class have been elected to public office in the jurisdiction, except that the fact that the protected class is too small to elect candidates of its choice shall not defeat a claim of vote denial or abridgment under this section. (vii) Whether there is a lack of responsiveness on the part of elected officials to the particularized needs of members of the protected class. (viii) Whether the policy underlying the State or political subdivision's use of the challenged qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure has a tenuous connection to that qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure. (B) A particular combination or number of factors under subparagraph (A) shall not be required to establish a violation of subsection (a) for vote denial or abridgment. (C) The totality of the circumstances for consideration relative to a violation of subsection (a) for vote denial or abridgment shall not include the following factors: (i) The total number or share of members of a protected class on whom a challenged standard, practice, or procedure does not impose a material burden. (ii) The degree to which the challenged standard, practice, or procedure has a long pedigree or was in widespread use at some earlier date. (iii) The use of an identical or similar standard, practice, or procedure in other States or political subdivisions. (iv) The availability of other forms of voting unimpacted by the challenged standard, practice, or procedure to all members of the electorate, including members of the protected class, unless the State or political subdivision is simultaneously expanding those other standards, practices, or procedures to eliminate any disproportionate burden imposed by the challenged standard, practice, or procedure. (v) A prophylactic impact on potential criminal activity by individual voters, if such crimes have not occurred in the State or political subdivision in substantial numbers. (vi) Mere invocation of interests in voter confidence or prevention of fraud. . (d) Intended