i remember with i have came to capitol hill, jesse helms received about 48% of the black vote in north carolina in his last election, that is incongruence. in my home state of missouri, senator kit bonds received about 40% of the african-american vote as a conservative white republican. what i don't get and how it fits into this debate, what we would call outlier behavior fit into the analysis of what makes a balanced representation in these districts. >> on the precise issue of racially polarized voting, it's flexible an dynamic definitions. brendan had one definition in the squiggles plural and the lower courts have been vowing welling it ever since. the default things is one that rick and abbey alluded to is there are significant difference. one test is would he won the election if only black people had voted, so even in your example of 48%, that would still be considered racial live polarized voting. he got 40% of the black vote but 60% went to his opponent. so the minority preferred candidate is his opponent and even the significant inroads by unless you've achieved either majorit