In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: sexual-explicit and non-sexual-explicit. A comment is considered sexual-explicit if it explicitly portrays sexual matters.

Comment: You do realize I'm sure that HRC campaign has successfully used fear to control the loyal subjects of the dem. party. It really is sad to see just how easy these voters are manipulated. She has disdain for her supporters but they refuse to allow that into their narrow vision.  DT has a unsavory past with his words. HRC has a corrupted past. However her ardent supports find more fault with mere words then they do with actions because the actions were committed by a dem. Pitiful that we have come to this point. You know, Nixon had to resign due to his cover-up, how many more cover-ups is HRC involved in? But again, since she has a "D" behind her name the ignorant dem. voters will either ignore, or more likely,  condone the criminal. The good news, her day is coming where she will be held accountable, the bad news, if she is elected first we get that insane Kaine. WLTDO, question for you, do you think the puppets even bother to read the leaks? I don't, they haven't been told to.
Non-sexual-explicit

Comment: While I agree with the basics of your thought (the Legislature failed us), to think the chief thief would not have vetoed the PFD is foolishness. That man wants our PFD, and nothing will stop him. The Legislature could have hacked the budget with a light saber, and Walker would have still capped our PFD.
Non-sexual-explicit

Comment: Eastman is a prick. Get out of my vagina! You must be angry you don't have one, you effing republican!  Doubt this passes the civil test, but at least I shouted it to 3 (hopefully) people!

Sexual-explicit