TASK DEFINITION: Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.
PROBLEM: Brian, thanks for very well written, but also disturbing, piece. You defend yourself very well against protestors and some iconic straw-man "the left" who accuse you, ironically, of believing what your candidate says he believes. 

Will your vote determined by some angry protestors and "the left?" I certainly don't call you racist, sexist, or ignorant. But I do ask, will you vote for a man who says what Mr. Trump says about Mexicans, Muslims, blacks, and women? Who ignores decades of foreign policy, and jumps to dangerous conclusions repeatedly? Who promises to deport 11 million people? Who would exclude immigrants on the basis of religious beliefs? You redefine him as "a fighter." Do you just disbelieve everything he says? 

And I'd join you, whole heartedly, in objecting to the name calling, polarizing, demeaning, common-enemy tactics of those protesters.  ... if you weren't using them to defend a man whose campaign has ridden those same tactics to unprecedented levels.

SOLUTION: Yes

PROBLEM: Depends on who and where you are.....

SOLUTION: No

PROBLEM: Yes, I was intending to compare both factors. Specifically, Table 13 of the report (p. 28) lists rates of violations resulting in a jail stay as a proportion of the population of each demographic on probation/parole, whereas Table 14 (p. 30) lists rates of violations resulting in a jail stay as a proportion of the total population of each demographic. 

My main beef with this article is that it seems to suggest that black adults are jailed at a disproportionately high rate because black adults violate probation/parole (resulting in jail stays) at a disproportionately high rate (i.e., data that would be found in Table 13, which fails to show such a lopsided disproportionality), but instead relates the data from Table 14, which seem irrelevant without also taking into account the proportions of each population on probation/parole in the first place.

SOLUTION:
No