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].
One example: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Bill Clinton is Positive . Bill Clinton knows how to win friends and influence people. The former president is a master of reinvention — and the same talents that guided him into office have propelled him, more recently, into the stratosphere of Internet stardom.
Solution is here: yes
Explanation: Here the author of the document praises Bill for this ability to win friends. Hence the sentiment should be Positive and the answer is yes.

Now, solve this: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Joe III is Positive . The similarities between Joe Kennedy III and Donald Trump are  in a sense  obvious. Both are white men  northeasterners  teetotalers. They are products of the Ivy League and great wealth. They joined their respective family trades – real estate for Trump  politics for Joe III.
The differences are obvious too  and more illuminating. Joe III is a liberal avatar of American institutions: the Kennedy family  Stanford  Harvard Law. Self-effacing in person  he recognizes how easy his path has been – he only briefly served as an assistant DA before taking a House seat -- and had  until now  chosen to mitigate charges of nepotism by playing the part of diligent backbencher. The Kennedys  for all their famous faults  have the saving grace that comes from being in on the joke; when President Kennedy appointed his younger brother attorney general  he quipped that he was just trying to give Bobby some experience before he started practicing law.
The result is the great destabilization of the Trump era. Few  it seems  have a firm grasp on what is happening  let alone what might happen next. Everybody  regardless of their ideology  thinks they're losing. A realignment appears to be happening in our politics  but nobody can agree on what it looks like. "We all feel the fault lines of a fractured country " as  Joe III  put it in  his  stilted  awkward speech on Tuesday night.
There is  of course  an element of nostalgia in liberalism's newfound fondness for our institutions. Trump-era liberalism  with its emphasis on American global leadership and veneration of federal agencies and the mainstream press  would be easily recognizable to that first generation of Kennedys. And in that sense  it makes sense that  Joe III  would become a natural face of contemporary Democratic politics.
Tuesday night was an attempt to make  Joe III  a symbol of institutional resistance to Trump. To the question of whether the institutions are worth saving  and therefore capable of reform   Joe III 's answer is an enthusiastic yes.  He  is  in a sense  already a symbol of how  his  own family has repaired itself from its reckless  impulsive  and selfish ways;  he  seems serious   he  is sober. The message  he  sends is that  his  family   his  party  and all the other institutions that nurtured  him  still have an innate and positive utility  an essential role to play. Where Trump says the rot must be amputated   Joe III  promises that a strong dose of antibiotics is all that's needed.
Whether this message resonates among the Democratic rank-and-file is another story. While the liberal commentariat   Joe III's  natural constituency  remains fixated on norms and the need to defend institutions  a newly ascendant left sees civility as a neoliberal plot to uphold the status quo. And whereas  Joe III  and  his  ilk see Trump as an aberration  the left sees  him  as a symptom of a decayed political order  they  wish to abolish and replace.
Robert Kennedy once said that he wished he had been born poor so he could have been a revolutionary. As his career advances  Joe III might harbor a similar desire  if only because his party is increasingly moving in a revolutionary direction.
Solution:
yes