In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: threat and non-threat. Threat is a statement that someone will be hurt or harmed, especially if the person does not do something in particular.

[Q]: Comment: It is beyond me how the Vancouver Mayor can say, with a straight face: "Vancouverites are frustrated particularly around housing affordability... We're working hard to deliver solutions..."

Hello?

"We're working hard to deliver solutions"?

Are you kidding me?

Look, Mister Mayor, could you please show me the news reports of you publicly and vocally demanding, to Trudeau and Couillard, that Ottawa and Quebec shut down the Quebec investor immigrant program on the grounds that it has flooded millions upon millions of dollars into the Vancouver real estate market?

See, strange thing, Mister Mayor, is when you Google, in the Google news search, the words "Greg Robertson" and "investor immigrant", you get ZERO hits!

And yet you pretend your team is working hard on house prices, do ya?

Dude, you have been so absent from solutions that your office is not even mentioned - not even once -in the online article summarizing events, "We've Let Vancouver Become a Playground for Plutocrats"!
[A]: Non-threat

[Q]: Comment: 1. The same restrictions we all have when it comes to what we say publicly. They are not allowed to slander or libel anyone, the same as us, but otherwise are free to say whatever is on their mind.
2. Why should anyone be punished for something they said, assuming it was neither slanderous or libelous? People who want other people punished for something they said have absolutely no concept of what "free speech" means.
3. I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. Contrary to the practices of either party, I believe the rule of law needs to be upheld. Both Republicans and Democrats alike are corrupt to the core, and both do this nation far more harm than good.

Remember, the First Amendment does not exist to protect speech with which we all agree. The First Amendment exists to protect the speech with which we disagree. Clearly this is a concept that Democrats are unable to grasp.
[A]: Non-threat

[Q]: Comment: It's always been fairly obvious that some right wingers hate and despise real American values.

The "election" of Kim Jong just made it more obvious.
[A]:
Non-threat