Given a document, an entity and its sentiment towards the entity, verify if it is the correct sentiment towards the entity. Answer should be yes or no. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

[Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Mitt Romney is Positive . "Mitt Romney .
[A]: no


[Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Jerry Richardson is Neutral . It has been a long time since two teams induced as many sofa spasms as the New England Patriots and Pittsburgh Steelers did  with those three false endings in the last two minutes. You thought  finally  the NFL is all about the game again. But just then  the skin-crawly headline came across the bottom of the screen  turning attention away from Tom Brady and Ben Roethlisberger to an old pot-belly named Jerry Richardson.
[Panthers owner Jerry Richardson announces plan to sell team amid NFL investigation]
Yet the viewer’s head swiveled back and forth between the Patriots-Steelers epic in the icing rain  and the alleged fetishes and racial attitudes of Carolina Panthers owner  Richardson  in  his  owner suite. On Friday  the Panthers announced that Richardson was being investigated for workplace abuses  and by Sunday morning  the story had exploded when Sports Illustrated published a host of sordid specific accusations ranging from sexual harassment to using a racial slur against an employee. These included Richardson supposedly asking to shave the legs of female employees and demanding to examine their backsides in their jeans.
But that wasn’t the end of the NFL day. Not thirty minutes after the final play in Pittsburgh  with fans still filing out of the stadium  came the seismic announcement that  Richardson  will be selling the Panthers  the franchise  he  has owned since it was founded in 1993. No explanation was offered  or needed. You have to assume that the disclosures were going to get uglier.
[Analysis: Forget the catch rule. The league has a replay problem] 
Richardson  is a perfect example of the extent to which the sheer girths of owners’ egos are eclipsing what should be the NFL’s true narrative: the game. Their incessant internecine rivalries and power struggles have become a chronic story line. It was  Richardson  who set the poisonous current tone of management-player relations  when  he  declared during the 2011 collective bargaining that the owners had “a [expletive] deal and we’re going to take back our league and [expletive] do something about it.” It was  Richardson  who  inexplicably grown arrogant on  his  Hardees franchise money  sat across a table and barked at Peyton Manning: “Do I need to help you read a revenue chart  son? Because I don’t know if you know how to read that.”
Richardson  no doubt  is also capable of individual kindness  and other owners will profess sorrow over his decision to sell  and wax nostalgic over the fact that he once caught passes from Johnny Unitas with the 1959-60 Baltimore Colts.  Richardson  is a self-made man  the first player since George Halas to acquire an ownership stake. But  Richardson   sadly  has acted as a toxic hardliner devoted to ensuring that no other player would ever be treated like a partner or equal.
[A]: yes


[Q]: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Tom Cotton is Neutral . Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) arrives for a weekly Republican Party luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 17. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters).
 Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)  last week helped kill the bipartisan immigration deal in Congress.  He  didn't think the bill went far enough in transforming the U.S. immigration system. Like President Trump   Cotton  thinks the United States should cut legal immigration. The senator's reasoning?
âIt can't simultaneously be true that robots will take all the jobs & that the West needs millions of new immigrants to do the grunt work â tweeted  Cotton  in late January  quoting a Wall Street Journal op-ed from a conservative commentator.
âI think itâs certainly critical that we reduce unskilled and low-skilled workers. It canât both be true ... that we need both more unskilled and low-skilled workers  but robots are going to take all the jobs â  Cotton  told Vox.
âTom Cotton is woefully misinformed â said Joe Brusuelas  chief economist at RSM. âRobots will create more jobs.â
[A]:
yes