In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: identity-attack and non-identity-attack. Identity attack refers to anything rude or disrespectful about someone's identity, including appearance, race, gender, and sexual orientation.

Comment: why can't someone feel threatened by big black woman and get rid of her?  what a farce..  what society must accept anything just because they are blacks?  no...
Identity-attack

Comment: No, we don't have to "agree to disagree." It's just something trite people like to say. (Note you didn't even agree but went on arguing your opinion with, of all things, an appeal to your ignorance.)

As for the appeal to cite "any person nationally," you haven't even cited anyone so bugger off already. (Note, nor would it matter as it's all just silly opinion anyway.)

I repeat, shake things up a bit and hire Kaepernick as the quarterback.
Non-identity-attack

Comment: Nice job BB!

Taking your analysis a little further, if enough Sanders supporters follow folks like the frequent poster here over the cliff, Sanders' "ideals" will be consigned to the ash-can of history. How can any sensible person believe that a Trump presidency would do anything other than place enormous power in a cabal of fascists?

I'm from the south, and I know a number of folks who have worked with Hillary, and she's held in the highest regard for her life's work. As another post pointed out, she's been the target of a relentless false narrative. Has she made mistakes? Of course. And some of them were big ones.

But she's been in the middle of the toughest decisions one can imagine and had to fight election campaigns with brutal adversaries. Sanders has never been tested by fire. And Trump is a maniacal clown, except as president of the most powerful country in the world, not so funny.

Let's hope smart folks who stood with Clinton in the primaries work hard for her election.

Non-identity-attack