As much as Mitt Romney gets criticized for failing to close the deal with Republican voters and capitalize on his perpetual frontrunner status, Newt Gingrich is experiencing the same problem in Florida. Newt, by all accounts, has won over the GOP's conservative base and has the Tea Party at his side. Yet voters cannot swallow the idea of Newt as their nominee. This will likely be his ultimate downfall. Newt represents an unelectable side of the party, and enough GOP voters are beginning to grasp that. http://www.sunstateactivist.org

Newt Gingrich is the ULTIMATE panderer. His remarks about Moonbase Newtie have to be seen in that context - Florida's "Space Coast" is a huge jobs/tourist complex and it not only provides a glitzy backdrop; its presence powers the local economy. Besides, you can't go there without getting jazzed up about astronauts and space exploration - I dare you!

Where's Steve Benen? Withdrawal.

Re: "the dead people voting" canard.

The serious Republicans know they can not win with their candidates or their policies. So they intend to win with dirty tricks. Old story. They used to just have to pander to the prejudice and fear of low-information voters. Fox Cable New was their megaphone for this. But after these debates and the surge of Newt Gingrich, the writing on the wall is pretty plain: It's getting hard out here for a pimp.

(Thank you Rachel Maddow and the TRM team for the many updated reports on this particular Republican dirty trick.)

The birther and religion issue that people keep bringing up to challenge President Obama's presidency is the low that put this whole election cycle to the lowest point in my opinion. It really bothers me that none of the GOP candidate just have the ball and put a stop to it. Each and every single one of them (except for Huntsman and we know where that got him) are riding it in one way or the other (through their own comment or in Mitt Romney's case, of course somebody else ~ his son ~ had to do the dirty work).

Though I have to say, Santorum got the "Lamest Excuses Award" in my book after the "It is not my job to defend the President" comment. That just top the "My tax file is in my computer at home and I'm not home" ~ response at the debate in SC.

He then went on and said "I'm doing my best to try and get him [President Obama] out of there — you're right he uniformly ignores the Constitution." If he really cares about the constitution, wants people to know that he uphold the Constitution, and really have to bring the Constitution to that conversation, he should simply say: "But Ma'am, there is no where in the Constitution that say it is illegal for a Non-Christian to be the President of this country. So I respect your concern, and I might disagree with a whole lot of what President Obama is doing to this country, but he is not illegal because of his religion." But he won't, will he? And why? Because religion is his only asset in this race. Take the religion aspect away and he is no longer relevant to the base.

Despicable. For me this shows (as if we need to be shown) even more the lack of personality value in all the GOP candidates. The current GOP base love to wave the constitutional and good religion flag, but none of them practice what's in the constitution nor the bible....sigh!

Cue "Space Cowboy" and "Take the Money and Run", by The Steve Miller Band!

And of course, I'm sure there will be Casinos on Newt's Moon Colony!

Given the so frequent clerical errors there is no telling how many South Carolinians are being "killed", or is it Gov. Haley Joel Osment's fault for seeing dead people?

You gotta get a segment/interview with Mike Daisey (The Agony and Ecstasy of Steve Jobs) on your show. He's right there in NY. Or at the very least go see his show.

That Apple article was pretty damning.

Dr. Maddow: In the interest of accuracy, it is important to ask how reflective of the general population were the participants in the CBS News Poll. How many were republicans/ independents / dems?

Doesn't the poll have an inherent bias due to the viewership of SOTU speech? I suspect it may not have been only Justices Scalia, Alito and Thomas who had no interest in listening to President Obama.

I am not saying this to undercut the President. Anyone who can do a search on campaign contributions knows that I have been a fervent supporter of Mr. Obama since he announced in Feb 2007. My point is one of adherence to empiricism. It is important to be honest about where we stand with independents and Reagan democrats. How useful have past polls been to indicate where we stand? How about the 2011 SOTU poll numbers? Just after the disastrous 2010 elections, the approval of the speech proposals was 83%. Looking back on 2011, was that a good indication of national support for the president?

No.

I am still waiting for an evaluation of the speech that gets at its core. I was highly critical of the speech yesterday, and that is no less true today. Sure- it is true that the unity of purpose that the nation felt at the end of World War II translated into unity of purpose against common economic problems. The speech implicitly suggests our generation can do the same. In terms of current political reality, it is also true that the only jobs or entitlement Bills that have a hope of passing the House are for military veterans. So I can see why using the metaphor of the unity of a military unit made sense politically. It is sensible tactics. But is this the national story we want to tell? That we are a warrior nation, and that we are going to annihilate our economic problems? As an upstanding erect citizen, the testosterone levels of that metaphor have an appeal I admit, but look at the dark side of that self identification.

What happens when we get a republican in the White House again and Hugo Chavez does something vaguely provocative and bingo there are drones all over Venezuela and Oil companies are planning their deals for new production in South America.

I can understand the political need to establish democratic majorities in the House and Senate, but there is long term cost if this is the sort of transformational narrative that the President wants to tell.

So will we be getting more trans-phobic hate speech from Rachel today? Lesbians have always had this.... thing, about transsexuals. I guess they feel threatened or something. And within the GLBT community there has always been some tension between the trans community and the angry bull-dyke lesbian community. Oh! Did I just say that? Yeah I did. I guess I feel I have a right to because Rachel gets to slur trans people so turn about is fair play. Right?

Anyway, no Rachel, you'll *never* look like a bad tranny doing Abe Lincoln if you wear that top hat. You/ll just look like what you are, an angry lesbian trying to climb the ladder on the backs of others. Good luck in your career.

RE: Alaska Airlines

I am always amazed when I see or hear of anyone being "insulted" or "offended" by religion. It's usually the same people that try to convince you that "their" god is the best god. It amounts to someone being insulted they get change in the form of penny when they pay for something that amounts to $9.99 when they hand over a ten dollar bill.

Maybe it's just that I respect other's views of religion as long as they aren't "preaching" at me. Sometimes I can take comfort in a psalm and other times I'm not feeling comfort. It doesn't offend me either way and it doesn't offend me if others take comfort or not.

Then, maybe people are just getting sick of religious "family values" being shoved down our throats by politicians and the media and they respond by being offended. Maybe the bigger fear is that the airline will treat all religions equal and give them the opportunity to "gasp!" have a quote from the koran on one of those cards. Blasphemy!

Re: Apple

Your poll omitted the real root cause for these practices - capitalism. Under a capitalist system corporations are responsible for maximizing profits. To achieve that they need to produce the best possible product at the lowest possible price. We consumers drive that by selecting what we perceive to be the best product at the lowest price.

In a system with unfettered capitalism this is assured to result in companies working to reduce labor and other costs as low as possible. That means paying the lowest possible wages that will still attract workers, minimizing the number of workers and requiring the remaining workers to put in more hours to maintain production. It also means other costs, like waste disposal, be done as cheaply as possible. Toxic waste is dumped into rivers and the air or disposed of in poorly run landfills.

The only solution is to this problem is to impose regulations on business. That means minimum wage laws, setting limits on the number of hours worked, imposing safety standards, creating rules on waste disposal etc.

This has served us well in the past, but then we removed restrictions allowing manufacturing to be globalized. That meant it was now possible for a corporation to chase around the planet to get the lowest possible labor costs and the least possible regulatory environment. Today the sweet spot for electronics manufacturers is China.

Electronics manufacturers are not charitable organizations. They simply follow the rules our society has defined to create a profit. Those who do the best job of that succeed. Apple does it very well and is very successful.

If we don't like the results of the system we have created, then it is up to us to change the system. Blaming corporations for doing what we have encouraged them to do - in fact demand that they do - will not be productive.

Re: GA Birthers

I am sad that this is even given press! In GA they are famous for saying that 'the South didn't lose the War they're only reloading' ~ this (the birther issue) is apparently their 'new' cause/focus. Hey GA GOP ~ you LOST the 2008 election just like you lost the Civil War! Welcome to America 2012!