instruction:
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].
question:
Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Nikki Haley is Positive . The vote came after  U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley  issued a stern warning United Nations that the United States "will remember" countries that voted for the measure.
 Haley  hinted that U.S. financial support for the U.N. is not guaranteed and that the U.S. should not be expected to support an organization that condemned it.
"The United States is by far the single largest contributor to the United Nations "  she  said  noting that "our participation in the U.N. produces great good for the world."
 Haley  said "the United States will remember this day" when it was "singled out for attack."
"America will put our embassy in Jerusalem "  Haley  said  adding that "no vote in the United Nations will make any difference on that. But this vote will make a difference on how Americans look on the U.N."
answer:
yes


question:
Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Mohammad Shawash is Negative . Mohammad Shawashâs  partly restored storefront stands amid a sea of smashed concrete and debris-laden roads.
The 62-year-old with a snow-white beard and glasses decided to return to the historic souk five months ago to reopen the shop  he  had managed for years.
âI cried when I first came back. I found total destruction all around me. The stores were destroyed  the streets covered in rubble and rocks  and the buildings collapsed â  he  told AFP.
âSo I repaired it  myself   to prove to the whole world that Aleppoâs Old City still has a soul.â
â âI lost  myself â â
âI was raised here and I used to open my shop from 7:00am until late at night. I knew everyone around  me  â  he  said.
âItâs not just about losing money or stock. I lost my neighbours  I lost my people  I lost  myself .â
answer:
no


question:
Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Hillary Clinton is Negative . Hillary Clinton . (Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)
Thereâs not much to do when youâre home for the holidays  so this season some have decided to fill up their free time by melting down over  a video that snipes at Hillary Clinton .
âTake up a hobby in the new year â a young writer holding a glass of champagne says to  Clinton  in the short  which Vanity Fair magazineâs âHiveâ vertical produced as part of a series proposing âresolutionsâ to various political figures. âVolunteer work  knitting  improv comedy â literally anything that will keep you from running again.â
Well  no.  The video  had sexist overtones  and the lameness of the jokes made them all the more offensive.  It âs harder to plead comedic license when your comedy isnât funny. But  Clinton  occupies an odd place in the political sphere:  She  was so close to the Oval Office for so long leading up to 2016 that  her  heir apparentness discouraged potential challengers. A career candidate from a Democratic dynasty held little appeal for anyone dissatisfied with the party status quo then  and will hold even less in 2020. Itâs not surprising that some cringe to think  Clinton âs shadow could still loom over races to come.
So then why resurrect  her ?
Although ride-or-die  Clinton  supporters werenât they only ones who took umbrage at the knitting comment  it was that cohort who turned particularly hysterical. These all-in  Clinton  fans seem determined to keep their candidate relevant: Even if they arenât calling on  her  to run again  they want  her  at the center of the political conversation. Every faux pas of President Trumpâs becomes an opportunity for Clinton-would-have-been-bettering. No kidding  she  would  yet thatâs neither here nor there when it comes to countering the damage Trump does every day  or to cultivating a roster of candidates who will win the seats to turn things around.
[Vanity Fair staffers provide snotty  condescending life tips for  Hillary Clinton ]
But more perplexing than the multitude of Clinton crusaders who are still crusading are the  Clinton  critics who continue to place the defeated candidate center-stage in their narratives even as they shriek that they want  her  out. This  besides its blatant unfunniness  may be the greatest failing of Vanity Fairâs ill-advised advice video. The staffers have devoted one minute and three seconds to telling  Clinton  to go away  and all theyâve succeeding in doing is bringing  her  right back.
This is âWhat Happened?â week on repeat. Journalists lambasted  Clinton  for re-litigating the 2016 primary in writing  and then they did the exact same thing. Over and over. They rolled their eyes at  her  play for attention  cash  catharsis or whatever else it was â and then they helped  her  find all of the above.
And itâs not only professional pundits who canât seem to give  Clinton  up. For every amateur commentator or plain old civilian re-upping a  Clinton  campaign talking point on Twitter  thereâs someone ready to fire back with an explanation of why  Clinton  is the worst politician of all time. This goes on  every day  more than a year after the election and almost a year after the man who beat  Clinton  walked into the White House.
Hours before the Vanity Fair outrage  Trump sent a Boxing Day Twitter missive from Mar-a-Lago in his usual style: âThey used this Crooked Hillary pile of garbage as the basis for going after the Trump Campaign!â he concluded  harping on his beef with  Clinton  yet again. Which prompted all his critics  left  very left and right alike  to tell him to get over it. Perhaps they should  too.
answer:

no