In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: disagree or agree. Classify the comment as disagree if it is likely to raise a certain level of public disagreement, whether healthy or unhealthy. The disagreement can be due to toxic content (for example, disrespect, identity attack, insult, and threat), controversial content, misunderstandings, or conflicting opinions. Classify the comment as agree otherwise.

Input: Consider Input: Comment: Wayne Easter, a 24 year Liberal MP from PEI, has had senior parliamentary secretary and committee roles and was in cabinet as Solicitor General in the Chretien government.

This makes him a double threat to Butts and other central Canada big city slickers (accent on slick) in the PMO who control the government agenda and messaging and try to control the MPs.

Being from PEI, he has an "annoying" tendency to be a down to earth, common sense, honest to a fault parliamentarian whom speaks his mind candidly about government gaffes and stupidities even by his own party.

Being a 24 year MP, he knows how parliament should work, how the government should interface with opposition MPs and how major changes to parliamentary rules and to tax and other fundamental policy should be developed and rolled out.

In April, he criticized the government's attempt to muzzle and marginalize the opposition.

Now he is defending small business from the new tax grab.

God bless you, Wayne Easter!

Output: Agree

Input: Consider Input: Comment: The headline reads "destroy jobs, save the planet". Does Wente support the opposite ?

Output: Disagree

Input: Consider Input: Comment: This article does what most articles that profess to express facts but are really opinion pieces does: It selects facts to try to bolster the opinion and make the opinion sound as if it is uncontrovertible evidence. The author mixes up "power" and "energy", global electricity production statistics and total energy consumption-related emissions - either deliberately or because he doesn't have a full grasp of the subject matter. And of course he uses the tired argument that because Canada is such a small producer of global greenhouse gas emissions that we shouln't be compelled to do something about our emissions. As the author is no doubt aware, that kind of thinking leads to global inaction on climate change, but then, that's probably what he wants. One little parting statistic: China is very committed to the Paris Climate Change Agreement and it alone represents 28% of total global greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion.
Output: Disagree