Categorize the comment on the basis of severe toxicity. If the comment is severely toxic output Yes, otherwise output No.

[EX Q]: I agree that all of these are frightening aspects of Trump. However, some of them apply equally to Clinton. I've been sitting through a primary where Clinton and her surrogates have been belittling even those liberals who don't support her (calling them sexist, stupid, etc.) She also has a history of doing whatever it takes to get her way regardless of the cost to others (ACA, eagerness to use military force, etc.) And both Trump and Clinton are corporatists.

Trump scares me, yes, but Clinton does as well.
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: Think of this situation: who bears responsibility for Lavoy Finecum being shot? I am saying both the officers who shot him and LaVoy. The officers for deciding to shoot and LaVoy for reaching for his pocket. Here is another situation, you go to a biker bar and insult the meanest biker in the joint, do you bear responsibility for getting assaulted or worse?
As far as the protestor is concerned, he chose to put himself in your "boxing ring", by creating a disturbance. Now, should he have been attacked, no. Again, I say he should not have been attacked. However, if you are at a firing range and you step in front of a target, do not be surprised if you get shot.
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Marco Rubio got it right when he called Trump a con man. How many of out other legislators are con artists? I can name one. Lisa Murkowski. She says she's for Alaskans. She says she understands the seriousness of issues plaguing our state yet continues to endorse unsustainable and environmentally devastating industries as well as the self-perpetuating Republican system.
[EX A]:
Yes