context: We cannot agree, however, that Dr. Lichtman's omission of General Assembly election data from his analysis undermines the validity of this methodology or the probativeness of his results.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 221 F.3d 1218, 1227
citation_a.parenthetical: district court not required to consider endogenous elections more probative
citation_a.sentence: See NAACP, 252 F.3d at 370 (“the exogenous character of elections does not render them nonpro-bative”); Solomon v. Liberty County Comm’rs, 221 F.3d 1218, 1227 (11th Cir.2000) (district court not required to consider endogenous elections more probative); Monroe v. Woodville, 881 F.2d 1327, 1330 (5th Cir.1989) (exogenous election data not per se irrelevant); see also Clark v. Calhoun County, 88 F.3d 1393, 1397 (5th Cir.1996) (based on statistical evidence from exogenous elections, court concludes that racially polarized voting exists).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 88 F.3d 1393, 1397
citation_b.parenthetical: based on statistical evidence from exogenous elections, court concludes that racially polarized voting exists
citation_b.sentence: See NAACP, 252 F.3d at 370 (“the exogenous character of elections does not render them nonpro-bative”); Solomon v. Liberty County Comm’rs, 221 F.3d 1218, 1227 (11th Cir.2000) (district court not required to consider endogenous elections more probative); Monroe v. Woodville, 881 F.2d 1327, 1330 (5th Cir.1989) (exogenous election data not per se irrelevant); see also Clark v. Calhoun County, 88 F.3d 1393, 1397 (5th Cir.1996) (based on statistical evidence from exogenous elections, court concludes that racially polarized voting exists).