Categorize the comment on the basis of threat. If the comment is threatening output Yes, otherwise output No.

[Q]: People are feeling disenfranchised by both political parties. Big money interests have purchased politicians in both parties so that no matter which party is in power, they still win. The rise of Sanders and Trump are testament to the frustration of the American people to the status quo. Sanders represents the desire to return to the progressive policies of presidents beginning w FDR that made this the country the envy of the world. Sadly, this country started turning it's back on populist policies in favor of corporatism beginning w the Carter administration. Unfortunately, the Trump candidacy is channeling this same frustration into baser human emotions of hate and prejudice.
There can be no hope for this country as long as we have a stranglehold on our political process by the two party system controlled by corporate interests. The current system of closed primaries and presidential debates is designed to prevent the rise of new parties responsive to the will of the people.
[A]: Yes


[Q]: I agree.  Tony Knowles was the last fiscal conservative we had as Governor.  Palin was a tax and spender, and Parnell just coasted along, Captain Zero
[A]: Yes


[Q]: The French Revolution was a positive for the development of modern France despite the Terror, the endurance of the Castro regime owes much to the US policy towards Cuba, American anti-communism and the Cuban emigrés, and Russia in 1917 went one particular way but could have played out differently. People have a right to control their lives and those who thwart the people, when they are organized, indeed do so to their detriment. If you are so worried about popular revolution, make sure and vote for the Democrat that advocates for release of some of the pressure building from the extreme concentration of wealth in the U.S. in the hands of the global super elites.
[A]:
No