Problem: OPTIONS:
- His shoes
- not enough information
- His glasses
- His smile
Q: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: I really struggle to feel bad for people who actively choose to be miserable and manipulative. I'm dorky and like to use little proverbs all the time. One of my favorites is this: "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." At the end of the day, if someone has a problem, they can never resolve it if they don't truly wish to. You can give someone all the resources in the world, but you can't force them to utilize them. When I was 16, I dated a horrible guy. He was abusive verbally, emotionally, and sexually. He was an incredibly troubled young man and refused to seek help for his severe mental health issues. I eventually came to understand that he reveled in his misery. It was his identity. He acted like he wanted a cure and I'd set him up with resources, but he refused every single one. He may have struggled with serious mental illnesses, but being miserable perversely made him happy and he loved to use his struggles to justify his inexcusable behavior. He wanted to drag as many people into his fiery pit of anguish as possible. I later suffered from severe depression myself, and I never once used it as an excuse to hurt other people. My ex wasn't struggling with his mental health in terms of deliberating and carefully harming others. He was simply exhibiting a personality trait, one he chose to cultivate and it wasn't my problem. I ended up cutting him off completely in spite of all the threats. I will never feel bad for the awful plight he refuses to help himself out of. I have no patience for that type of person. Know what we call them? Toxic. Poison. A waste of time. Question: What did she love most about her abusive boyfriend Answer:
Answer: not enough information

Problem:OPTIONS:
- She went back to the bar to drink
- She went to the hospital in an ambulance
- not enough information
- She went to sleep

Read the following context and answer the question. Context: A few times. Mostly whilst doing this job and trying to help drunk people or assholes. Sadly it's becoming a regular occurrence for crews to be assaulted. My last time was a few days ago and the worst thing about it was watching my crew mate and several police officers curl up laughing. I'll set the scene. Imagine. If you will. A large rather expensive hotel. Then add to that image a rather drunk and buxom young lady who is lying on the floor in a drunken slumber after taking off a lot of her clothes. She was just in her underwear. We were called to look after her. On our arrival she was absolutely fine. Stood up, walked to the stretcher and lay down. Whining about how we were the ' oppressors of society', and other such drivel Because I had the cheek to try and give her a tiny bit of dignity by covering her up with a blanket. She didn't want that. We made it to the ambulance without any hassle and started to do the necessary checks we do on every patient. Blood pressure etc etc when out of the blue she decided that she wanted to release her rather large breasts. Try as I might to give her a little bit of dignity she wasn't interested so we just made sure no one could see inside the ambulance. After a few minutes she calmed down so I put the blanket over her. Something I do for almost every patient. Without warning THWACK. she hit my in the face with her boob. Then. As I reeled from this waiting for my brain to catch up and make sense of everything, THWACK she did it again. Right round the face with a large breast!! I turned around to get some support from my colleagues who were crying. Both my crew mate and the officer. Crying. Neither able to speak.. I didn't know what to say for a while after thatsomething my crew mate called 'a blessing' Sigh Question: What did the lady do after the end of the story Answer:
****
A: She went to the hospital in an ambulance

input: OPTIONS:
- six months
- one week
- not enough information
- two weeks Now, answer this question: Read the following context and answer the question. Context: The U.S. Supreme Court plunged into the politically messy issue of redrawing congressional and legislative districts Tuesday, in a case that could have profound implications for both major political parties for years to come. The high court heard oral arguments in a case brought by Democratic voters in Wisconsin. They argued that a Republican redistricting plan for the state assembly was so overtly partisan that it violated constitutional protections of freedom of speech and equal protection under the law for Wisconsin voters. A lower federal court sided with the challengers last year and against Republican state officials in Wisconsin. Officials argued Tuesday that they had not violated any constitutional rights when they drew up new boundaries for state assembly districts. "Our legislature followed traditional redistricting criteria, which is what they have been required to do and we think they followed that and that the justices will agree," Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel told reporters in front of the court following the oral arguments. The process of state legislatures redrawing congressional and legislative district boundaries has been enmeshed in politics for two centuries. Early on, the process was referred to as "gerrymandering," where one party or the other tries to gain an electoral advantage by redrawing district boundaries to maximize their voting clout. Republicans have had success in several states in redrawing congressional and legislative voting districts and that has helped them maintain their majority in the House of Representatives. Democrats have come under fire as well for partisan maps in states where they control the legislature, like Maryland and Massachusetts. During Tuesday's oral arguments, the more liberal high court justices seemed open to the case brought by Democratic voters. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said a ruling in favor of the Republican districting plan in Wisconsin would encourage others to stack the deck against their political opponents. "What becomes of the... Question: How long did the supreme court consider the case? Answer:
A:
output:
two weeks