Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language Detected language: English [00:00.000 --> 00:17.000] This Sunday, live from Des Moines on this New Year's Day, just 48 hours before the Iowa [00:17.000 --> 00:22.000] caucuses, the official start of this presidential election year. [00:22.000 --> 00:27.440] Senator Rick Santorum surges in the closing days, but will it be enough to buy him a ticket [00:27.440 --> 00:29.160] out of the Hawkeye State? [00:29.160 --> 00:30.800] Iowa provides the spark. [00:30.800 --> 00:35.160] There's plenty of tender on the ground that will start burning in these other states. [00:35.160 --> 00:39.000] Senator Santorum here with us for an exclusive interview this morning. [00:39.000 --> 00:44.240] Meanwhile, Mitt Romney is trying to keep his spot atop the polls as he makes his final [00:44.240 --> 00:45.240] push. [00:45.240 --> 00:50.760] This is an election not only to replace a president, it's an election to save the soul [00:50.760 --> 00:51.760] of America. [00:51.760 --> 00:57.600] And Newt Gingrich still losing some support, but will his emotional moment in Iowa humanize [00:57.600 --> 00:58.600] him to voters? [00:58.600 --> 01:15.560] We'll break down the state of the race and the impact of the caucuses with the chairman [01:15.560 --> 01:21.440] of Iowa's Republican Party, Matt Strong, and NBC News political director Chuck Todd. [01:21.440 --> 01:26.000] Plus full analysis from our political roundtable, columnist for the Des Moines Register, Kathy [01:26.000 --> 01:32.160] Obradovich, Republican strategist Mike Murphy, New York Times columnist David Brooks, Time [01:32.160 --> 01:38.040] Magazine senior political analyst Mark Halpern, and host of Andrea Mitchell Reports, NBC's [01:38.040 --> 01:39.040] Andrea Mitchell. [01:39.040 --> 01:59.000] Live from Des Moines, Iowa, this is a special edition of Beat the Press with David Gregory. [01:59.000 --> 02:00.000] Good morning. [02:00.000 --> 02:01.000] Here we go. [02:01.000 --> 02:05.080] The presidential race of 2012 is about to officially begin as the voting starts here [02:05.080 --> 02:06.920] in Iowa on Tuesday. [02:06.920 --> 02:11.120] And here's how the race looks this morning with the Des Moines Register poll showing [02:11.120 --> 02:16.880] a three-way race now with Romney leading Ron Paul by two points and Rick Santorum with [02:16.880 --> 02:17.880] a late surge. [02:17.880 --> 02:23.280] We will talk to Santorum about his surprise momentum in the race in just a couple of moments. [02:23.280 --> 02:27.600] But first, we have with us NBC's political director Chuck Todd and the chairman of Iowa's [02:27.600 --> 02:29.800] Republican Party, Matt Strong. [02:29.800 --> 02:30.800] Welcome to both of you. [02:30.800 --> 02:31.800] Good morning. [02:31.800 --> 02:32.800] Happy New Year. [02:32.800 --> 02:33.800] Good morning. [02:33.800 --> 02:34.800] Welcome to Iowa. [02:34.800 --> 02:37.040] So Chuck Todd, partner, where are we this morning? [02:37.040 --> 02:40.320] Well, I think we're trying to figure out this, is what are Iowa caucus goers going [02:40.320 --> 02:41.320] to do? [02:41.320 --> 02:42.320] What are these Republicans? [02:42.320 --> 02:44.200] Are they going to come into these caucuses Tuesday night and pick a president? [02:44.200 --> 02:47.840] Or are they going to do what they've done in the past, which is send a message and win [02:47.840 --> 02:48.840] out the field? [02:48.840 --> 02:53.520] If they come in and a lot of them want to pick a president, Mitt Romney is going to win, [02:53.520 --> 02:57.280] turnout is going to go up, you're going to see the casual voters show up and that's [02:57.280 --> 02:58.440] good for Romney. [02:58.440 --> 03:05.120] If it's the old style, sort of the activists that show up, I think Santorum has enough [03:05.120 --> 03:06.120] momentum. [03:06.120 --> 03:10.080] There's a little bit of a wild card here in Rick Perry, but then Santorum does get out [03:10.080 --> 03:13.640] of here with some momentum and I think that that's what we don't know. [03:13.640 --> 03:15.400] Let me stick with Santorum with you, Chuck. [03:15.400 --> 03:19.920] If you look inside the numbers of the poll, the last couple of days when they were in [03:19.920 --> 03:25.600] the field talking to folks, this is what you see, that Santorum is actually in 21% because [03:25.600 --> 03:29.920] in those last two days, his numbers actually shoot up 6%. [03:29.920 --> 03:34.840] So if you're measuring intensity, not looking at the full range of the poll, but just the [03:34.840 --> 03:38.200] last couple of days, you see Santorum's really got that buzz. [03:38.200 --> 03:40.200] And that was the big thing out of the NBC Marist poll. [03:40.200 --> 03:43.280] And if you look at both polls together, you can almost see they sort of fit together and [03:43.280 --> 03:44.280] you see this. [03:44.280 --> 03:48.240] And it was Santorum and Ron Paul, for instance, that had much more intensity than Mitt Romney. [03:48.240 --> 03:52.920] In fact, Rick Perry had more intense support in our poll than Mitt Romney did. [03:52.920 --> 03:54.320] And that's the Romney problem. [03:54.320 --> 03:59.600] He's got the, well, I guess I'm going to be for Romney voter, but does that person show [03:59.600 --> 04:00.600] up? [04:00.600 --> 04:01.600] And that's what we don't know. [04:01.600 --> 04:05.120] So, Matt Straughn, you're the chairman of the party here in the state. [04:05.120 --> 04:06.120] And this is important. [04:06.120 --> 04:09.520] I mean, this is the first voting in the presidential campaign. [04:09.520 --> 04:12.840] What's the mindset of an aisle where we're Republican going into this caucus? [04:12.840 --> 04:16.080] Well, I think the other key takeaway, not just in the NBC Marist poll, but in the Duane [04:16.080 --> 04:20.000] Register poll this morning, is the fact that two out of every five caucus scores could [04:20.000 --> 04:22.320] still change their mind between now and caucus day. [04:22.320 --> 04:23.320] And I think it gets to that. [04:23.320 --> 04:24.320] It gets to the volatility. [04:24.320 --> 04:25.320] It is. [04:25.320 --> 04:27.240] And it's moved from three out of five, which it was just a couple of weeks ago. [04:27.240 --> 04:31.640] And I think that's the juxtaposition between the desire to beat Barack Obama, but also [04:31.640 --> 04:35.960] making sure that we have a nominee that can aggressively articulate the Republican-Principal [04:35.960 --> 04:37.960] conservative message going into a general election. [04:37.960 --> 04:38.960] Well, so what's more important? [04:38.960 --> 04:43.280] Because we've seen Santorum's latest ad is really about electability. [04:43.280 --> 04:48.000] I can beat Barack Obama, but for the breadth of the campaigning in Iowa, it's been who's [04:48.000 --> 04:49.160] the true conservative? [04:49.160 --> 04:53.760] Has there been a change because there hasn't been a love affair among voters with Mitt [04:53.760 --> 04:56.760] Romney who's been the frontrunner throughout most of this contest? [04:56.760 --> 04:59.720] But I think the first thing you see when you talk to any Iowa Republican is that desire [04:59.720 --> 05:03.520] to beat Barack Obama because we understand that we can't afford former years in Obama [05:03.520 --> 05:07.520] administration that is hostile to our party's values and our principles. [05:07.520 --> 05:11.080] And that's the tension why you still have two out of every five Iowa caucus scores have [05:11.080 --> 05:12.900] not yet made a decision. [05:12.900 --> 05:15.280] And that's really going to get down to on Tuesday night. [05:15.280 --> 05:18.760] You always hear the mantra, organization, organization, organization. [05:18.760 --> 05:23.400] The organized campaign is going to have someone in each of those 1,774 precincts to make the [05:23.400 --> 05:27.600] case not only why a candidate can beat Barack Obama, but why they have the principles of [05:27.600 --> 05:29.640] our party to carry the banner going into the general. [05:29.640 --> 05:31.480] You know, remember what happens on Tuesday night? [05:31.480 --> 05:34.280] There's a set of speeches that happen before the actual vote. [05:34.280 --> 05:37.960] And I think that that is why, for instance, Rick Santorum is making an electability argument [05:37.960 --> 05:41.400] because that's the problem he himself said he was running into. [05:41.400 --> 05:42.400] We agree with you. [05:42.400 --> 05:47.320] He fits the Iowa Republican caucus electorate better, frankly, than any of these candidates. [05:47.320 --> 05:51.800] Better than Rick Perry without all of the baggage that he accumulated himself. [05:51.800 --> 05:52.880] Better than a Newt Gingrich. [05:52.880 --> 05:53.880] He fits it. [05:53.880 --> 05:57.880] The social conservative values that are very strong inside the Iowa Republican Party. [05:57.880 --> 06:00.840] But he said himself, people would come up to him, but I don't think you can win. [06:00.840 --> 06:04.660] Not only I don't even think you can go on to other states, well, he's got to make that [06:04.660 --> 06:06.120] case at the end. [06:06.120 --> 06:09.840] And if he does, he's got the biggest, he's got the most room to grow here. [06:09.840 --> 06:13.680] And that's why he, you know, on paper, yes, Romney's ahead. [06:13.680 --> 06:16.800] I think it wouldn't surprise anybody if Santorum was the one that comes out of here with the [06:16.800 --> 06:17.800] actual victory. [06:17.800 --> 06:20.760] Chuck, talk about the volatility a little bit, as we've been covering this. [06:20.760 --> 06:24.200] Anybody you talk to about the race is still shaking their head about, well, wait a minute, [06:24.200 --> 06:27.920] there was Bachman, then there was Perry, and then there was Herman Cain, and then there [06:27.920 --> 06:28.920] was Gingrich. [06:28.920 --> 06:29.920] And now he's falling back. [06:29.920 --> 06:30.920] What's going on? [06:30.920 --> 06:31.920] It's about Mitt Romney. [06:31.920 --> 06:36.200] Mitt Romney is not viewed as conservative enough for where this Republican Party is today. [06:36.200 --> 06:40.200] He's been trying to do this, you know, we did a little word search on the word conservative [06:40.200 --> 06:41.200] with Mitt Romney. [06:41.200 --> 06:44.680] You know, in the first half of his campaign, he didn't even use the word very often. [06:44.680 --> 06:48.520] In the last six weeks, he talks about it all the time, tries to say, I am a conservative, [06:48.520 --> 06:52.920] I'm, you know, and he talks about the electability, but that has been, that is ultimately the [06:52.920 --> 06:53.920] issue. [06:53.920 --> 06:58.480] We still have 75% likely of the Iowa Republican caucus electorate that's going to vote for [06:58.480 --> 06:59.600] somebody else. [06:59.600 --> 07:02.320] You know, that's still a challenge for Romney. [07:02.320 --> 07:06.840] And I think that it may be what some activists here in Iowa decide to do is say, we're going [07:06.840 --> 07:11.400] to, we got to force Mitt Romney to keep proving his conservative credentials, to say, you've [07:11.400 --> 07:13.920] got to, you're not going to end this early. [07:13.920 --> 07:15.840] You've got to go out there and earn the conservative. [07:15.840 --> 07:17.200] Now, what about turnout? [07:17.200 --> 07:21.000] Because this is a big key, bigger turnout, presumably better for Romney, because a lot [07:21.000 --> 07:25.880] of strategists I've talked to say, those could be moderates, those could be independents, [07:25.880 --> 07:31.080] even Democrats who come out and say, no, we don't want a Santorum of a Bachman or Paul [07:31.080 --> 07:32.080] doing that. [07:32.080 --> 07:33.760] Well, we don't want to represent Iowa that way. [07:33.760 --> 07:34.760] We want to go with Romney. [07:34.760 --> 07:39.040] Well, I think one thing you see in 2008, we had a record turnout with just under 120,000 [07:39.040 --> 07:40.320] Iowa Republicans. [07:40.320 --> 07:44.440] And in that four years span since then, we've had 33 straight months of Republican registration [07:44.440 --> 07:45.680] gains here in Iowa. [07:45.680 --> 07:48.640] So we've got about 30,000 more Iowa Republicans. [07:48.640 --> 07:52.720] We had the second largest attendance we saw ever at the Aimee Strupp Hall in August. [07:52.720 --> 07:56.520] And it's the first chance anybody in the country gets to vote to start the process to replace [07:56.520 --> 07:57.520] Barack Obama. [07:57.520 --> 08:01.240] So I would be surprised if we didn't have a strong turnout Tuesday night. [08:01.240 --> 08:04.680] And with good weather for those senior citizens, when you look at the poll results, Mitt Romney [08:04.680 --> 08:07.680] does the best with 60 and over voters. [08:07.680 --> 08:10.920] So I think we are set up to have a strong turnout and people do need to remember in [08:10.920 --> 08:14.520] the Iowa caucuses as an independent or a Democrat, you can register as a Republican [08:14.520 --> 08:15.520] that night and participate. [08:15.520 --> 08:17.720] He's making a pitch there, you see that? [08:17.720 --> 08:20.760] But higher to the more this is a primary, the better they say it. [08:20.760 --> 08:25.720] If this were a primary and there were no speeches that night before you voted, Mitt Romney would [08:25.720 --> 08:26.760] win by 10 points. [08:26.760 --> 08:30.040] So we always have this debate about Iowa, but it's more intense now. [08:30.040 --> 08:36.680] You know, the history of the Iowa caucuses, retail campaigning, a real chance to interact [08:36.680 --> 08:38.060] with voters one-on-one. [08:38.060 --> 08:42.000] The truth of the matter is that it's a lot like big time politics everywhere else now. [08:42.000 --> 08:48.760] More than $16 million of TV advertising, blanketing the airwaves, so much of it, negative. [08:48.760 --> 08:52.360] And here was the headline in the Wall Street Journal editorial on Tuesday. [08:52.360 --> 08:56.080] It was as Iowa goes, so goes Iowa. [08:56.080 --> 09:01.240] Gail Collins piling on in the New York Times on Thursday writing, feel free to ignore Iowa. [09:01.240 --> 09:04.680] The Republicans hope to get more than 100,000 participants. [09:04.680 --> 09:07.840] That's about the same number of people in Pomona, California. [09:07.840 --> 09:11.080] Imagine your reaction to seeing a story saying that a plurality of people in Pomona thought [09:11.080 --> 09:13.720] Newt Gingrich would be the best GOP presidential candidate. [09:13.720 --> 09:17.240] Would you say, wow, I guess Newt is now the frontrunner? [09:17.240 --> 09:18.240] Possibly not. [09:18.240 --> 09:23.720] Now I'm from the Los Angeles area, so I don't like anybody picking on Pomona. [09:23.720 --> 09:26.160] But is Iowa going to pick the president? [09:26.160 --> 09:29.400] Well, listen, this is the quad radial attack on the Hawkeye State. [09:29.400 --> 09:30.800] And I think Iowa is representative. [09:30.800 --> 09:34.600] If you look at the last four national presidential elections, Iowa's popular vote is [09:34.600 --> 09:36.480] mirrored what has happened nationally. [09:36.480 --> 09:38.920] And you also have to think of what our role in the process is. [09:38.920 --> 09:39.920] We're first. [09:39.920 --> 09:40.920] We're not last. [09:40.920 --> 09:41.920] We're not the decider. [09:41.920 --> 09:43.480] We start winnowing the field. [09:43.480 --> 09:46.240] But the one thing you can't discount, though, is there are very few things the last two [09:46.240 --> 09:48.600] presidents of the United States have in common. [09:48.600 --> 09:51.680] But their path to the White House did start by winning the Iowa caucuses. [09:51.680 --> 09:52.680] Final point here, Chuck. [09:52.680 --> 09:54.040] Keys to Tuesday. [09:54.040 --> 09:56.240] What are you looking for in the next couple of days? [09:56.240 --> 09:57.840] To me, it's the Rick Perry number. [09:57.840 --> 09:59.240] He is the wild card here. [09:59.240 --> 10:03.560] Newt, I think we clearly know Gingrich is on his way down, and he may have been single [10:03.560 --> 10:05.280] digits before it's all said and done. [10:05.280 --> 10:08.480] So this little boomlet of his, an amazing rise and fall. [10:08.480 --> 10:09.960] But what happens to the Perry supporter? [10:09.960 --> 10:13.960] Does the Perry supporter that walks in on caucus night, who is also a social conservative, [10:13.960 --> 10:15.200] do they stick with him? [10:15.200 --> 10:16.760] How committed to him are they? [10:16.760 --> 10:22.080] Or do they end up buying the Santorum argument that says, you know what, I'm the conservative [10:22.080 --> 10:25.200] that can come out of here, that can win, that can keep going on. [10:25.200 --> 10:27.360] And what happens to that? [10:27.360 --> 10:30.040] And by the way, Mitt Romney, he needs a strong Rick Perry. [10:30.040 --> 10:33.800] He needs Rick Perry just strong enough so that Perry will go to South Carolina and won't [10:33.800 --> 10:34.800] get out of the race. [10:34.800 --> 10:37.720] Does the field narrow after the results here? [10:37.720 --> 10:42.400] Well, I think it will narrow in the actual, does the actual playing field narrow? [10:42.400 --> 10:43.400] Maybe by one candidate. [10:43.400 --> 10:44.920] Maybe a Bachman ends up getting out. [10:44.920 --> 10:46.920] Newt has no incentive to get out. [10:46.920 --> 10:48.240] Perry, let's see what he does. [10:48.240 --> 10:51.920] If Perry is at 15, he stays in, he goes on to South Carolina. [10:51.920 --> 10:56.680] If he's closer to 10, I think then he may pack it in. [10:56.680 --> 10:58.160] That's not good for Mitt Romney, by the way. [10:58.160 --> 11:01.560] He needs a few more conservatives to hang around so he can steal South Carolina. [11:01.560 --> 11:02.560] We'll leave it there. [11:02.560 --> 11:04.960] Chuck Todd, Matt Straughn, thank you both very much. [11:04.960 --> 11:09.100] We're going to turn now to a man who has been making a late surge here in Iowa, former [11:09.100 --> 11:13.560] two term senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum. [11:13.560 --> 11:17.160] Santorum has spent more time in Iowa this cycle than any other candidate and was the [11:17.160 --> 11:22.200] first to visit all 99 counties in the state with limited resources and money and staff. [11:22.200 --> 11:26.200] He's been traveling from event to event in a pickup truck. [11:26.200 --> 11:30.720] Earlier this week, a CNN time poll showed him for the first time in the top three. [11:30.720 --> 11:34.240] And now he's suddenly turning out larger crowds and drawing more media attention. [11:34.240 --> 11:39.040] He's hoping to make a strong showing in Iowa by courting conservative voters just as previous [11:39.040 --> 11:46.560] caucus winner Mike Huckabee did four years ago. [11:46.560 --> 11:48.320] Senator Santorum, welcome back to Meet the Press. [11:48.320 --> 11:49.320] Thank you, David. [11:49.320 --> 11:50.320] Good to be with you. [11:50.320 --> 11:53.560] So this is the candidate that I'm sitting with who's got the hot hand in Iowa. [11:53.560 --> 11:59.240] Here's the Des Moines Sunday Register here, Romney Paul lead, Santorum closes in. [11:59.240 --> 12:03.160] We just talked about in that last segment how you have had this surge, particularly [12:03.160 --> 12:05.920] in the last couple of days. [12:05.920 --> 12:06.920] What does it mean? [12:06.920 --> 12:08.640] What does it say to you about what's going on here in the state? [12:08.640 --> 12:12.280] Well, the people of Iowa, I've been saying this from the very beginning. [12:12.280 --> 12:13.680] People have asked me, when are you going to get your surge? [12:13.680 --> 12:14.920] You're not going anywhere. [12:14.920 --> 12:16.320] Your message must not be resonated. [12:16.320 --> 12:19.480] And I said, my surge is going to come on January 3rd. [12:19.480 --> 12:23.680] So the people of Iowa do what they do, which is actually analyze the candidates, figure [12:23.680 --> 12:28.400] out where their positions are, find out who's the right leader, who's got what it takes [12:28.400 --> 12:31.280] to defeat Barack Obama and to lead this country. [12:31.280 --> 12:35.600] And I've always relied that when that crunch time comes in these last two weeks, that's [12:35.600 --> 12:37.960] when we're going to start to pick up and that's exactly what's happened. [12:37.960 --> 12:43.280] You've talked about needing a miracle here in Iowa, but expectations have changed now. [12:43.280 --> 12:48.040] Is anything less than a win here, not measuring up to expectations? [12:48.040 --> 12:51.520] That's really pretty funny, actually, because 10 days ago, I was at 5%. [12:51.520 --> 12:54.880] And every question I got was, why don't you pack it up? [12:54.880 --> 12:56.840] Why don't you endorse another candidate? [12:56.840 --> 13:00.000] And now 10 days later, you're saying, oh, you've got to win another beat. [13:00.000 --> 13:01.000] Exceed expectations. [13:01.000 --> 13:04.960] Look, we feel very good about the way things are going on the ground. [13:04.960 --> 13:06.360] We've got a great grassroots organization. [13:06.360 --> 13:09.080] We've got a great team of people who are out helping us. [13:09.080 --> 13:13.640] And they're committed to making sure that this isn't a pure victory in November, that [13:13.640 --> 13:17.880] we actually elect someone who's exactly what America needs to turn this country around. [13:17.880 --> 13:22.240] Not someone who, well, just might be able to win and then not really do the change that's [13:22.240 --> 13:23.240] necessary in Washington. [13:23.240 --> 13:26.120] But one more on just flat expectations. [13:26.120 --> 13:29.640] You feel at this point, particularly, you've got to do better than a Michelle Bachman or [13:29.640 --> 13:31.440] Rick Perry in order to continue in this race. [13:31.440 --> 13:33.280] Yeah, I've always said there's really three primaries. [13:33.280 --> 13:36.640] I mean, you have the conservative primary, and you mentioned the other two people who [13:36.640 --> 13:38.520] I think are in the conservative primary. [13:38.520 --> 13:43.240] You have the libertarian primary, and then you have Gingrich and Romney sort of fighting [13:43.240 --> 13:45.120] for the establishment vote. [13:45.120 --> 13:47.280] And our feeling was from the very beginning. [13:47.280 --> 13:53.680] If we can pace ahead of Perry and or Bachman, that we'd be in good shape, and we're moving [13:53.680 --> 13:54.960] in that direction, certainly, right now. [13:54.960 --> 13:56.360] You talk about electability. [13:56.360 --> 13:58.240] You talk about conservative credentials. [13:58.240 --> 14:03.880] But we've been checking on this, you know, it would be 20 years ago this week, actually, [14:03.880 --> 14:07.440] that you began your service in Washington, and had you not lost for reelection, you'd [14:07.440 --> 14:11.040] still be in Washington as a senator. [14:11.040 --> 14:15.360] But you spent 16 years as a member of Congress, four in the House, 12 in the Senate. [14:15.360 --> 14:19.240] And yet, there's nobody who served with you who's endorsed you, have they? [14:19.240 --> 14:21.400] It's funny, I haven't asked anybody. [14:21.400 --> 14:25.760] And the reason I haven't asked anybody, I'm sitting at 3% in the national polls. [14:25.760 --> 14:29.440] And I really haven't gone out and asked any United States senator, I haven't asked a single [14:29.440 --> 14:34.440] one to endorse me, because I felt like I had to earn it first, that I had to go out and [14:34.440 --> 14:37.120] prove to the, you know, I lost my last race. [14:37.120 --> 14:42.920] And the general consensus was, you know, we like Rick, but, you know, who goes from losing [14:42.920 --> 14:46.320] their last Senate race to winning the presidential nomination? [14:46.320 --> 14:48.440] My answer to that was, well, Abraham Lincoln. [14:48.440 --> 14:51.200] But other than Abraham Lincoln, this is not a common occurrence. [14:51.200 --> 14:56.200] But nobody was going out on a limb to offer, given having served with you, knowing your [14:56.200 --> 14:58.280] credentials, knowing your principles. [14:58.280 --> 15:02.880] Yeah, again, no one's going to call you and say, you know, gee, can I, you know, can I [15:02.880 --> 15:05.960] help your campaign at 3%? [15:05.960 --> 15:10.040] And I would have said to them, you know what, wait, because it doesn't matter, I don't really [15:10.040 --> 15:12.200] need or want Washington endorsements. [15:12.200 --> 15:13.520] That's not what I'm here to do. [15:13.520 --> 15:14.920] I'm here to change Washington. [15:14.920 --> 15:16.880] And so I didn't really seek out endorsements. [15:16.880 --> 15:18.240] I didn't really want their endorsements. [15:18.240 --> 15:19.560] I didn't think they would help very much. [15:19.560 --> 15:20.720] Would you seek them out now? [15:20.720 --> 15:22.600] If people want to endorse me, I'd love their endorsements. [15:22.600 --> 15:24.920] But that's not what I'm coming here to do. [15:24.920 --> 15:30.040] I'm not coming to be buddies with my friends in the Senate and the House. [15:30.040 --> 15:33.080] I'm coming to change the entire nature of Washington, D.C. [15:33.080 --> 15:38.680] It's been one of the benefits, frankly, of being out and looking in and seeing what, you [15:38.680 --> 15:43.320] know, sometimes you said, you know, I was, you know, running as a consistent conservative. [15:43.320 --> 15:44.800] There are votes that I took. [15:44.800 --> 15:47.160] Not that I advocated these things, but I voted for some things. [15:47.160 --> 15:49.360] I look back and say, why the heck did I do that? [15:49.360 --> 15:54.640] You get involved in sort of the idea that, well, you've got to make things happen. [15:54.640 --> 16:00.280] And you forget sometimes, you know, sometimes making some things happen is better off making [16:00.280 --> 16:01.280] nothing. [16:01.280 --> 16:03.160] I wonder if one of those examples might be pork barrel spending, because you're getting [16:03.160 --> 16:07.080] hit by Rick Perry about that by supporting the notorious bridge to nowhere. [16:07.080 --> 16:11.400] What are the pork barrel projects where you deliver cash for folks back in your home state? [16:11.400 --> 16:15.160] Do you regret voting for some of those projects? [16:15.160 --> 16:16.960] You've defended pork barrel spending in the past. [16:16.960 --> 16:21.720] What I've said is that your role as a member of Congress, if you look at the Constitution, [16:21.720 --> 16:22.720] is to appropriate money. [16:22.720 --> 16:25.160] And of course, to your appropriate money, you're going to say where that money is going [16:25.160 --> 16:26.160] to go. [16:26.160 --> 16:27.160] You're not going to say, well, here's the money, Mr. President. [16:27.160 --> 16:28.480] Spend any way you want. [16:28.480 --> 16:32.960] And historically, Congress has taken the role of, you know, allocating those resources. [16:32.960 --> 16:38.120] And, you know, Jim DeMint, who led the charge on pork barrel spending, earmarked things [16:38.120 --> 16:39.120] for years and years. [16:39.120 --> 16:43.520] And so what happened after I left Congress was budgets began to explode. [16:43.520 --> 16:47.320] When I was in the Senate, I voted for tough budgets. [16:47.320 --> 16:51.040] I voted for restrictions on spending and made sure that that didn't happen. [16:51.040 --> 16:54.720] And as president, I proposed cutting $5 trillion over five years. [16:54.720 --> 16:58.680] I proposed we're going to balance the budget, and at least five years, hopefully sooner. [16:58.680 --> 17:03.520] So if you're looking for someone who's voted for tough budgets, voted for spending restraints. [17:03.520 --> 17:04.520] But that wasn't my question. [17:04.520 --> 17:07.400] Do you regret supporting earmarks when you did? [17:07.400 --> 17:11.840] I don't regret going out at the time and making sure that the people of Pennsylvania, [17:11.840 --> 17:16.080] who I was elected to represent, got resources back into the state after spending money. [17:16.080 --> 17:17.080] So if there's a surplus, that's OK. [17:17.080 --> 17:18.080] But if the budget's tighter, it's not? [17:18.080 --> 17:19.080] No. [17:19.080 --> 17:20.080] What happened was abuse. [17:20.080 --> 17:21.520] There was abuse of this process. [17:21.520 --> 17:22.640] And I agreed with that. [17:22.640 --> 17:23.640] There wasn't abuse. [17:23.640 --> 17:24.640] And it was leading to more spending. [17:24.640 --> 17:26.920] It was leading to bigger spending bills. [17:26.920 --> 17:28.760] And it had to end, and I supported it. [17:28.760 --> 17:30.800] But Rick Perry calls it a fleecing of America. [17:30.800 --> 17:31.800] Do you agree that's what it is? [17:31.800 --> 17:35.480] Well, that's pretty funny, because Rick Perry was hiring lobbyists to fleece America then, [17:35.480 --> 17:39.200] because he was hiring lobbyists to represent the state of Texas to get more money back. [17:39.200 --> 17:43.200] And I suspect if you ask Kay Hutchison or if you ask John Cornyn or any of the Texas [17:43.200 --> 17:46.640] delegation whether Rick Perry wanted money coming back to the state of Texas that Texan [17:46.640 --> 17:49.000] sent there, they'd say yes, he did. [17:49.000 --> 17:53.440] So look, there is a legitimate role for Congress to allocate resources. [17:53.440 --> 17:55.760] That's what the Constitution requires them to do. [17:55.760 --> 17:58.720] When there's abuse, then you curb the abuse, and I supported that. [17:58.720 --> 18:00.880] Let's talk about final arguments here in Iowa. [18:00.880 --> 18:04.560] Your latest ad talks about conservative credentials and electability. [18:04.560 --> 18:05.960] Let me play a portion of it. [18:05.960 --> 18:09.040] Who has the best chance to beat Obama? [18:09.040 --> 18:12.120] Rick Santorum, a full-spectrum conservative. [18:12.120 --> 18:17.440] Rick Santorum is rock solid on values issues. [18:17.440 --> 18:22.880] So you've been making that contrast, consistently questioning Governor Romney. [18:22.880 --> 18:27.800] You're calling him a liberal Massachusetts governor, arguing in fact that he is a moderate. [18:27.800 --> 18:30.800] You had back in 2008 when he was running for the presidency, you were singing a different [18:30.800 --> 18:31.800] tune. [18:31.800 --> 18:33.200] This was your press release back then. [18:33.200 --> 18:37.080] You said Governor Romney is the candidate who will stand up for the conservative principles [18:37.080 --> 18:38.440] that we hold dear. [18:38.440 --> 18:42.200] He has a deep understanding of the important issues confronting our country today, and [18:42.200 --> 18:46.400] he is the clear conservative candidate that can go into the general election with the [18:46.400 --> 18:48.280] United Republican Party. [18:48.280 --> 18:51.080] We'll stand up for the conservative principles that we hold dear. [18:51.080 --> 18:54.480] You've been praised his work on fighting same-sex marriage. [18:54.480 --> 18:55.480] What changed? [18:55.480 --> 18:57.880] Well, what changed was who he's running against. [18:57.880 --> 19:03.520] At the time, that was five days or four days before Super Tuesday was after Florida, and [19:03.520 --> 19:06.800] it became clear to me that there were two candidates in the race at that point. [19:06.800 --> 19:11.920] I thought Mike Huckabee, I would have loved to have Mike Huckabee out there, but I made [19:11.920 --> 19:16.240] the political judgment right or wrong that the best chance to stop John McCain, which [19:16.240 --> 19:17.600] was what my concern was. [19:17.600 --> 19:22.680] I had served 12 years with John McCain, I like and respect John McCain immensely personally, [19:22.680 --> 19:26.360] and he's done a lot of great things, obviously, for this country, but I did not think he was [19:26.360 --> 19:30.960] the right person based on my experience and deep knowledge of his record that he was the [19:30.960 --> 19:32.560] right person to be the nominee. [19:32.560 --> 19:36.440] You said that Romney will stand up for the conservative principles that we hold dear, [19:36.440 --> 19:37.440] but you didn't say compared to. [19:37.440 --> 19:39.000] Well, of course I'm not going to say compared to. [19:39.000 --> 19:42.760] I mean, I'm trying to advocate for his candidacy at a time when I don't... [19:42.760 --> 19:43.760] So you didn't mean that then? [19:43.760 --> 19:47.440] Well, I was saying it relative to John McCain, and that's what I meant then. [19:47.440 --> 19:49.840] And remember, it's not like I was an early supporter of Romney. [19:49.840 --> 19:53.040] I endorsed him actually seven days before he dropped out of the race. [19:53.040 --> 19:54.800] So maybe I was a little bit of... [19:54.800 --> 19:57.840] Does he have conservative values, conservative principles? [19:57.840 --> 19:58.840] Of course. [19:58.840 --> 20:03.960] Everybody on that stage that is in these debates has conservative values vis-a-vis President [20:03.960 --> 20:06.960] Obama and generally reflects the Republican Party. [20:06.960 --> 20:12.320] The question is, are those values ones that you can trust when they become President of [20:12.320 --> 20:17.120] the United States, is it someone who you know is going to fight not just for certain things, [20:17.120 --> 20:19.400] but for the entire Republican platform and plank? [20:19.400 --> 20:20.400] Why? [20:20.400 --> 20:22.440] Because those things integrate together. [20:22.440 --> 20:24.040] And you've heard me talk about this many times. [20:24.040 --> 20:28.240] You can't have a strong economy and just a strong economic plan unless you have strong [20:28.240 --> 20:30.760] families and you have moral values in this country. [20:30.760 --> 20:31.760] Why? [20:31.760 --> 20:32.760] Because that's the underpinning of our society. [20:32.760 --> 20:34.960] But you're talking about trust as a conservative. [20:34.960 --> 20:37.760] You're talking about trust as a conservative. [20:37.760 --> 20:42.600] And you have accused Romney of tacking back and forth as he sought election, calling him [20:42.600 --> 20:44.960] a liberal governor from Massachusetts. [20:44.960 --> 20:50.560] But we look at your own record as well, running for reelection to the Senate in 2006 in a democratic [20:50.560 --> 20:52.240] state of Pennsylvania. [20:52.240 --> 20:56.040] Now here in Iowa, you've taken the pledge, opposing abortion. [20:56.040 --> 21:01.640] Back on this program this summer, you said you oppose abortion without exception. [21:01.640 --> 21:05.440] And yet when you were running for reelection in 2006, you had a different view. [21:05.440 --> 21:07.160] And this is what you told the Associated Press. [21:07.160 --> 21:10.840] The question was, do you support legalized abortion if a woman has been raped or if she [21:10.840 --> 21:12.360] is the victim of incest? [21:12.360 --> 21:16.400] What about if a woman's health or life is in danger, please explain your answer. [21:16.400 --> 21:20.880] Back then you said, I would support laws that include exceptions in cases of rape and incest [21:20.880 --> 21:23.400] and when the life of the mother is at risk. [21:23.400 --> 21:27.840] So didn't you, when you were running for reelection, do the same thing you've accused Romney of, [21:27.840 --> 21:31.280] which is moderating your stance to try to win a democratic state? [21:31.280 --> 21:35.520] Today I would support laws that would provide for those exceptions, but I'm not for them. [21:35.520 --> 21:37.680] In other words, I support the Hyde Amendment. [21:37.680 --> 21:41.160] The Hyde Amendment provides exception for rape and incest in the life of the mother. [21:41.160 --> 21:45.480] And so, yes, I support laws that provide those exceptions because if we can get those [21:45.480 --> 21:48.080] passed, then we need to do that. [21:48.080 --> 21:49.080] But my... [21:49.080 --> 21:51.080] That's not a violation of your pledge that you took here in Iowa? [21:51.080 --> 21:52.080] No. [21:52.080 --> 21:53.080] You try to... [21:53.080 --> 21:54.080] I supported the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. [21:54.080 --> 21:55.080] Now, does that ban all abortions? [21:55.080 --> 21:56.080] No. [21:56.080 --> 21:57.480] But it moves the country in the right direction. [21:57.480 --> 22:01.960] And so what I've said in the past consistently is I'll support laws that move the ball forward. [22:01.960 --> 22:05.480] That doesn't mean that's my position and that's where I'd like to go, but that's exactly [22:05.480 --> 22:08.280] the direction that we need to go in. [22:08.280 --> 22:13.720] The issue of moderation goes beyond abortion. [22:13.720 --> 22:17.940] Back in 2006, you were fighting the idea that you were seen as too conservative. [22:17.940 --> 22:23.240] You had television ads heralding the fact that you oppose reductions in the minimum [22:23.240 --> 22:27.000] wage, that you were fighting cuts against Amtrak. [22:27.000 --> 22:32.720] Isn't your history to try to moderate both when fighting for reelection, but also as [22:32.720 --> 22:36.000] a member of Congress to try to find common ground and to compromise? [22:36.000 --> 22:39.080] Of course, my background is to find compromise. [22:39.080 --> 22:40.840] That's what you have to do in order to get things done. [22:40.840 --> 22:42.760] You don't compromise on your principles. [22:42.760 --> 22:45.120] I use welfare reform as an example. [22:45.120 --> 22:50.240] I went out and helped author the welfare reform bill that became the Contract with America [22:50.240 --> 22:51.240] bill. [22:51.240 --> 22:54.680] And then when I was in the United States Senate, I managed that bill as a first term, first [22:54.680 --> 22:56.120] year member of the United States Senate. [22:56.120 --> 23:00.960] I went up against Daniel Patrick Mourney and Ted Kennedy and battled over two vetoes of [23:00.960 --> 23:02.960] President Clinton was able to get it done. [23:02.960 --> 23:03.960] Did I make compromises? [23:03.960 --> 23:09.080] You bet, but the compromises I made were not fundamental to the transformation that was [23:09.080 --> 23:12.480] important in welfare, which was to end the federal entitlement. [23:12.480 --> 23:16.160] The only bill that I'm aware of, the only law that's actually ever ended a broad-based [23:16.160 --> 23:21.040] federal entitlement, I was the author and manager of the bill on, and we put time limits [23:21.040 --> 23:24.360] on welfare and we put a work requirement in place. [23:24.360 --> 23:27.200] Those were the things that I believe were transformational. [23:27.200 --> 23:29.000] Was I willing to compromise on daycare funding? [23:29.000 --> 23:30.000] Yes, I was. [23:30.000 --> 23:34.000] Was I willing to compromise on transportation to get folks from welfare to work? [23:34.000 --> 23:35.000] Yes, I was. [23:35.000 --> 23:39.880] But what we did was something that was moving the direction of a more limited government, [23:39.880 --> 23:44.400] and in order to get the necessary votes to get that done, you have to make compromise. [23:44.400 --> 23:49.960] But we did a direction of limited government, maybe less than what we wanted to, but we [23:49.960 --> 23:53.520] weren't going in the direction of more government and getting less of more. [23:53.520 --> 23:58.320] That's where Republicans have been in error for so many years, and that is compromising [23:58.320 --> 24:03.080] on just a little less big government, instead of saying, no, no more compromises and less [24:03.080 --> 24:04.080] big government. [24:04.080 --> 24:09.840] We'll compromise on less, less government, but not going the other way. [24:09.840 --> 24:17.000] One of the things you look at as an insurgent party trying to beat an incumbent president, [24:17.000 --> 24:21.480] you said that a second term for President Obama would be dangerous for the country, [24:21.480 --> 24:24.120] is that you look at the party that's making the challenge. [24:24.120 --> 24:28.840] And here's the reality, disapproval for the Republican Party right now in Congress. [24:28.840 --> 24:34.160] I should say approval of Republicans in Congress stands at 26%. [24:34.160 --> 24:36.640] That's far less than the president's approval rating. [24:36.640 --> 24:41.160] And Dan Balls writes this in The Washington Post in his column on Tuesday, for GOP candidates [24:41.160 --> 24:42.920] worries about the party's brand. [24:42.920 --> 24:46.240] A year ago, after their big victory in the midterm elections, Republicans were full of [24:46.240 --> 24:49.720] confidence and anticipation as Americans look toward next November. [24:49.720 --> 24:53.800] The question that many will be asking is, are the Republicans really ready to lead? [24:53.800 --> 24:57.920] In three political arenas, Congress, the states, and the presidential campaign trail, Republicans [24:57.920 --> 25:00.880] have left a checkered record in the past year. [25:00.880 --> 25:08.080] In Congress, it was the debt debacle forcing a near shutdown of the government, the payroll [25:08.080 --> 25:13.240] tax debate that looked to go in the president's favor, the fight with the unions in the states [25:13.240 --> 25:14.600] like Wisconsin. [25:14.600 --> 25:18.880] Do you fault Republican leaders in Congress for not doing more to make government work [25:18.880 --> 25:20.880] better through more compromise with the president? [25:20.880 --> 25:25.200] You have to have someone you can work with, and this president has done more to divide [25:25.200 --> 25:28.080] than any other president that I've ever witnessed in my lifetime. [25:28.080 --> 25:31.760] This president goes out and gives speech after speech after speech, trying to divide America [25:31.760 --> 25:36.760] between class, between income group, between racial and ethnic groups. [25:36.760 --> 25:39.160] This is the great divider in chief. [25:39.160 --> 25:43.280] And it's very difficult when you're being lampooned by the president on a regular basis, [25:43.280 --> 25:46.640] not just as a party, but individually. [25:46.640 --> 25:50.280] And the president, who I don't believe has met with Boehner or any of the Republican [25:50.280 --> 25:54.960] leadership in now six months, hard to compromise and work with someone who won't meet with [25:54.960 --> 25:58.680] you, who won't sit down and try to negotiate things and try to talk. [25:58.680 --> 26:03.960] And so I'm not surprised at all that Republicans are having a difficult time with someone who [26:03.960 --> 26:04.960] has no interest. [26:04.960 --> 26:05.960] Clearly, he's not with him. [26:05.960 --> 26:09.320] I mean, even the debt fight over the summer was a constant set of meetings, so that can't [26:09.320 --> 26:10.320] be accurate. [26:10.320 --> 26:14.200] Well, if you look at it, the last time he's had meetings, I know it's been several months. [26:14.200 --> 26:18.760] And I know that President Bush, when I was there and President Reagan, routinely met [26:18.760 --> 26:24.000] on a regular basis with the other side and developed relationships, you know, it's just [26:24.000 --> 26:25.000] about trust. [26:25.000 --> 26:28.880] And you don't build trust by going up and running around the country, beating up on [26:28.880 --> 26:29.880] your opponent. [26:29.880 --> 26:32.000] He's the president of everybody in this country. [26:32.000 --> 26:35.320] As president of the United States, I would be someone who would meet regularly, who would [26:35.320 --> 26:37.680] talk and try to build relationships of trust. [26:37.680 --> 26:46.240] So you don't fault Republicans for intransigence on taxes or spending or other areas of potential [26:46.240 --> 26:48.120] compromise with the president. [26:48.120 --> 26:55.200] Again, we go back to the basic fact, the federal government now is spending about 25% of GDP. [26:55.200 --> 26:58.480] That historically, the average is about 18%. [26:58.480 --> 27:01.320] We have an explosion of spending. [27:01.320 --> 27:06.200] And the problem in this country is government oppression, spending, and that's leading to [27:06.200 --> 27:08.240] huge debts and deficits. [27:08.240 --> 27:11.280] What the Republicans have said is, no more. [27:11.280 --> 27:13.920] We are going to move in the direction of smaller government. [27:13.920 --> 27:16.760] And President Obama has no interest in doing that. [27:16.760 --> 27:20.080] I think Republicans are right to stand and fight on this. [27:20.080 --> 27:24.120] And the president seems to be absolutely disinterested in listening to what the American public [27:24.120 --> 27:27.600] said in the last election, which is we want more limited government. [27:27.600 --> 27:28.880] He did not get the message. [27:28.880 --> 27:31.400] I guess he's going to have to get this message hopefully in November. [27:31.400 --> 27:33.840] Before you go, I want to ask you about foreign policy. [27:33.840 --> 27:37.480] You've been very critical of the president, particularly on the issue of Iran, which has [27:37.480 --> 27:39.880] been a big issue of debate here in Iowa. [27:39.880 --> 27:42.920] Let me play a portion of that. [27:42.920 --> 27:50.600] And this president, for every thug and hooligan, for every radical Islamist, he has had nothing [27:50.600 --> 27:52.920] but appeasement. [27:52.920 --> 28:00.240] We saw that during the lead up to World War II, appeasement. [28:00.240 --> 28:04.800] How can that possibly be accurate if you've taken an objective look at the foreign policy [28:04.800 --> 28:06.200] of this administration? [28:06.200 --> 28:10.800] What on Iran specifically separates the approach that President Obama has taken and that of [28:10.800 --> 28:11.800] President Bush? [28:11.800 --> 28:17.360] One, he didn't support the pro-democracy movement in Iran in 2009 during the Green Revolution. [28:17.360 --> 28:22.080] Almost immediately after the election, excuse me, like with hours after the polls closed, [28:22.080 --> 28:25.880] Ahmadinejad announced that he won with 62% of the vote. [28:25.880 --> 28:29.640] Within a few days, President Obama basically said that that election was a legitimate one. [28:29.640 --> 28:31.160] What would that have done specifically to disarm? [28:31.160 --> 28:34.840] Well, I understand why the president would understand that someone announcing a minute [28:34.840 --> 28:37.480] after the polls closed that he won, I mean, he comes from Chicago. [28:37.480 --> 28:38.480] So I get it. [28:38.480 --> 28:43.120] The problem is that this was an illegitimate election, the people in the streets were rioting [28:43.120 --> 28:45.720] saying, please support us, President Obama. [28:45.720 --> 28:47.120] We are the pro-democracy movement. [28:47.120 --> 28:51.040] We want to turn this theocracy that has been at war with the United States, that's developing [28:51.040 --> 28:55.880] a nuclear weapon, that's killing our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq with IEDs. [28:55.880 --> 28:58.840] And the president of the United States turned his back on them. [28:58.840 --> 29:03.320] At the same time, a few years later, we have the same situation where Muslim Brotherhood [29:03.320 --> 29:08.440] and Islamists are in the streets of Egypt opposing an ally of ours, not a sworn enemy [29:08.440 --> 29:13.520] like Iran, but an ally of ours in Mubarak and he joins the radicals instead of standing [29:13.520 --> 29:15.120] with our friends. [29:15.120 --> 29:17.440] First of all, that's patently contradictory. [29:17.440 --> 29:21.840] If you say you support democracy, there was a democratic movement in Egypt and the Muslim [29:21.840 --> 29:22.880] Brotherhood got elected. [29:22.880 --> 29:26.680] So how could you be for democracy in some countries and not others, which is inconsistent? [29:26.680 --> 29:29.520] No, the Muslim Brotherhood is not about democracy. [29:29.520 --> 29:30.960] The Muslim Brotherhood are Islamists. [29:30.960 --> 29:33.520] The Muslim Brotherhood are going to impose a real law. [29:33.520 --> 29:34.520] They're popularly elected. [29:34.520 --> 29:35.520] Isn't that what democracy is about? [29:35.520 --> 29:36.520] No. [29:36.520 --> 29:37.520] But I ask you about disarming Iran. [29:37.520 --> 29:42.320] There is no material difference in terms of how the Bush administration sought to disarm [29:42.320 --> 29:45.080] Iran and what the Obama administration has done. [29:45.080 --> 29:47.400] There's a material difference in this respect. [29:47.400 --> 29:51.400] Number one, the Bush administration worked with me in passing the Iran Freedom Support [29:51.400 --> 29:55.800] Act, which I authored, which imposed tough sanctions on the Iranian nuclear program and [29:55.800 --> 29:59.000] provided funding for the pro-democracy movement. [29:59.000 --> 30:02.280] When President Obama came into office, he cut that funding. [30:02.280 --> 30:08.080] President Obama did not provide funding into Iran to help those folks who wanted to overthrow [30:08.080 --> 30:09.080] this democracy. [30:09.080 --> 30:12.560] And when the time came to support them, he chose not to. [30:12.560 --> 30:17.000] That is a substantive difference between my policy, which I was a leader on in the Senate, [30:17.000 --> 30:19.720] and what President Bush tried to do when he was president. [30:19.720 --> 30:22.240] There is no good option to disarm Iran. [30:22.240 --> 30:23.240] Yes, there is. [30:23.240 --> 30:24.320] The Bush administration knew that. [30:24.320 --> 30:25.720] This administration knows that. [30:25.720 --> 30:26.920] Tell me what you would do differently then. [30:26.920 --> 30:32.000] I put forth a five-point plan that said fund the pro-democracy movement, use covert activity [30:32.000 --> 30:33.000] to disrupt. [30:33.000 --> 30:34.000] Which is already being done, Senator. [30:34.000 --> 30:35.000] You know that. [30:35.000 --> 30:38.960] There's covert activity to set back their program by the Israelis, by the United States. [30:38.960 --> 30:41.240] Well, we know by the Israelis. [30:41.240 --> 30:43.720] We don't have any evidence if you look at what's being done. [30:43.720 --> 30:47.280] Most of the evidence actually trails back to the Israelis and the methodologies that [30:47.280 --> 30:48.280] they use. [30:48.280 --> 30:52.280] There's no evidence the United States is at all complicit in working at that. [30:52.280 --> 30:57.800] I would be very direct that we would, in fact, and openly talk about this. [30:57.800 --> 30:58.800] Why? [30:58.800 --> 31:01.680] Because I want to make sure that Iran knows that when I say that Iran is not getting a [31:01.680 --> 31:05.680] nuclear weapon, that we will actually effectuate policies that make that happen. [31:05.680 --> 31:07.240] This president has not done that. [31:07.240 --> 31:10.640] He has opposed tough sanctions on Iran, on their oil program. [31:10.640 --> 31:11.640] Why? [31:11.640 --> 31:15.600] Because he's concerned about the economy and his reelection instead of the long-term national [31:15.600 --> 31:17.280] security interests of this country. [31:17.280 --> 31:22.040] I would say to every foreign scientist that's going into Iran to help them with their program, [31:22.040 --> 31:25.400] you will be treated as an enemy combatant, like an al-Qaida member. [31:25.400 --> 31:28.400] And then finally, I would be working openly with the state of Israel. [31:28.400 --> 31:31.680] And I would be saying to the Iranians, you either open up those facilities, you begin [31:31.680 --> 31:36.120] to dismantle them and make them available to inspectors, or we will degrade those facilities [31:36.120 --> 31:39.000] through airstrikes and make it very public that we are doing that. [31:39.000 --> 31:40.000] The president has done none of this. [31:40.000 --> 31:43.640] So you would lay out a red line, and if they passed it, airstrikes by a president sent [31:43.640 --> 31:44.640] to Iran. [31:44.640 --> 31:47.280] Iran will not get a nuclear weapon under my watch. [31:47.280 --> 31:49.080] Well, two previous presidents have said that. [31:49.080 --> 31:51.640] You would order airstrikes if it became clear that they were going to. [31:51.640 --> 31:53.240] That's the plan. [31:53.240 --> 31:58.280] I mean, you can't go out and say, this is the problem with this administration. [31:58.280 --> 32:01.560] You can't go out and say, this is what I'm for, and then do nothing. [32:01.560 --> 32:05.440] You become a paper tiger, and people don't respect our country, and our allies can't [32:05.440 --> 32:06.440] trust us. [32:06.440 --> 32:07.640] That's the problem with this administration. [32:07.640 --> 32:08.640] All right. [32:08.640 --> 32:11.320] Before I let you go back to the politics, you're going to win this thing? [32:11.320 --> 32:12.320] I feel good. [32:12.320 --> 32:13.320] I mean, that's up to the people of Iowa. [32:13.320 --> 32:16.960] I've always said that the people of Iowa are the ones who I put my trust in, and not [32:16.960 --> 32:18.240] just Iowa, New Hampshire. [32:18.240 --> 32:19.760] We've got a great team up in New Hampshire. [32:19.760 --> 32:24.000] We've got about two dozen state legislators who have signed on to our campaign, county [32:24.000 --> 32:25.360] attorney's sheriffs. [32:25.360 --> 32:28.840] We've got a great team up there, and we're going to have a big jump here in Iowa. [32:28.840 --> 32:32.680] I don't know what it's going to be, but unlike Rick Perry, unlike Michelle Bachman, unlike [32:32.680 --> 32:36.040] others, we're going to New Hampshire because we're going to compete in every region of [32:36.040 --> 32:37.120] this country. [32:37.120 --> 32:38.520] I come from the Northeast. [32:38.520 --> 32:41.880] I've been able to get the blue collar voters, the Reagan Democrats, to vote for me in the [32:41.880 --> 32:45.040] past, and we're going to do the same thing, and that's why we're going to win this election. [32:45.040 --> 32:46.040] Senator Santorum, thank you. [32:46.040 --> 32:47.840] We'll see you in New Hampshire for our debate next week. [32:47.840 --> 32:48.840] Thanks, David. [32:48.840 --> 32:49.840] Thanks. [32:49.840 --> 32:53.960] And coming up on this New Year's Day, the final countdown to Iowa, Ron Paul with a strong [32:53.960 --> 32:58.160] showing in the polls, drawing fire now from his Republican rivals, while Mitt Romney sets [32:58.160 --> 33:02.720] his sights on President Obama, who just four years ago pulled off a surprise, come from [33:02.720 --> 33:04.000] behind win here. [33:04.000 --> 33:07.400] Plus, the president and his team gearing up for the fight as well. [33:07.400 --> 33:11.120] He's going to the important battleground state of Ohio the day after the caucuses. [33:11.120 --> 33:13.160] It's a new year and a new campaign. [33:13.160 --> 33:15.680] We'll break it all down with our political roundtable. [33:15.680 --> 33:20.520] Joining us, the Des Moines registers, Kathy Obradovich, Republican strategist, Mike Murphy, [33:20.520 --> 33:25.480] David Brooks of the New York Times, Mark Halpern of Time Magazine, and NBC's Andrea [33:25.480 --> 33:27.880] Mitchell. [33:27.880 --> 33:34.080] Meet the Press is brought to you by The Boeing Company. [33:34.080 --> 33:35.600] Have you met your skin twin? [33:35.600 --> 33:38.240] Cover Girl True Blend has skin twin technology. [33:38.240 --> 33:42.640] Other makeup can sit on your skin, so it looks like makeup, but True Blend has skin twin [33:42.640 --> 33:45.240] technology to actually merge with your skin. [33:45.240 --> 33:47.560] How easy, breezy, beautiful is that? [33:47.560 --> 33:50.120] True Blend from Cover Girl. [33:50.120 --> 33:57.320] The Super Bowl, the most epic day in America, and the end of a journey that began here. [33:57.320 --> 34:03.400] When the swipe of a Visa card gave one man the chance to bring happiness to 10 friends [34:03.400 --> 34:05.720] and a new lease on life to one. [34:05.720 --> 34:07.720] That was a false start. [34:07.720 --> 34:08.720] What? [34:08.720 --> 34:09.720] Yeah, me ma. [34:09.720 --> 34:10.720] Yes? [34:10.720 --> 34:11.720] I wouldn't take a seat in the Super Bowl. [34:11.720 --> 34:12.720] Pack your bags. [34:12.720 --> 34:15.600] Use your Visa card for a chance to win. [34:15.600 --> 34:19.000] To choose your tent, go to our Facebook page. [34:19.000 --> 34:22.720] Whoa, this is not the number we talked about. [34:22.720 --> 34:24.200] That's our phone number. [34:24.200 --> 34:27.440] No surprise pricing is one thing that makes Pearl Vision different, and here's something [34:27.440 --> 34:28.440] else. [34:28.440 --> 34:31.640] Buy a pair of eyeglasses or prescription sunglasses, and we'll give you another pair, free. [34:31.640 --> 34:34.960] Visit PearlVision.com for a store near you. [34:34.960 --> 34:37.880] Holidays were meant for family. [34:37.880 --> 34:42.400] Jeep Grand Cherokee is the most awarded SUV ever. [34:42.400 --> 34:48.200] Jeep Compass gets up to 29 MPG Highway, and the Jeep Wrangler has an all-new powertrain [34:48.200 --> 34:51.000] with improved performance and fuel economy. [34:51.000 --> 34:54.200] Season's greetings from our family to yours. [34:54.200 --> 34:58.000] Hurry in the year's best deals and January 3rd. [34:58.000 --> 35:02.120] During the big finish event, well-qualified last seas get the 2012 Grand Cherokee Laredo [35:02.120 --> 35:04.960] 4x2 for $309 a month. [35:04.960 --> 35:07.000] Celebrate the new year with a great night's sleep. [35:07.000 --> 35:11.280] Mancini Sleep World can make it happen for less during our 50% off mattress sale. [35:11.280 --> 35:15.520] It's the perfect time to get that luxurious mattress you've been waiting for at a drastically [35:15.520 --> 35:16.720] reduced price. [35:16.720 --> 35:20.860] Imagine curling up in a luxurious Simmons Beauty Rest, relaxing in the comfort of memory [35:20.860 --> 35:24.680] foam on a sort of perfect sleeper, or how about a plush, ceiling-poster-pedic? [35:24.680 --> 35:29.800] Your choice of comfort, 50% off, and with no interest until 2014, the savings really [35:29.800 --> 35:30.800] add up. [35:30.800 --> 35:31.800] Visit SleepWorld.com. [35:31.800 --> 35:32.800] I love a new bed. [35:32.800 --> 35:40.400] The Iowa Caucuses will have full analysis from our political roundtable, joining me Kathy [35:40.400 --> 35:44.560] Abradovich from the Des Moines Register, Mike Murphy, David Brooks, Mark Halperin, [35:44.560 --> 35:46.400] and NBC's Andrea Mitchell. [35:46.400 --> 35:50.400] Up next, after this brief commercial break. [35:50.400 --> 35:51.400] I have a cold. [35:51.400 --> 35:54.000] I took Nyquil, but I'm still stumped up. [35:54.000 --> 35:56.200] Truth is, Nyquil doesn't unstuff your nose. [35:56.200 --> 35:57.200] Really? [35:57.200 --> 36:00.200] Alka Sulser plus liquid gels fight your worst cold symptoms, plus it relieves your stuffy [36:00.200 --> 36:01.200] nose. [36:01.200 --> 36:02.200] Thank you. [36:02.200 --> 36:05.160] That's the cold truth. [36:05.160 --> 36:07.320] What makes the Sleep Number Store different? [36:07.320 --> 36:09.800] You walk into a conventional mattress store. [36:09.800 --> 36:10.800] It's really not about you. [36:10.800 --> 36:13.640] They say, well, if you wanted a firm bed, you can lie on one of those. [36:13.640 --> 36:15.640] If you want a soft bed, you can lie on one of those. [36:15.640 --> 36:19.480] We provide the exact individualization that your body needs. [36:19.480 --> 36:21.320] It's really shaping to my body. [36:21.320 --> 36:23.960] Once they get our bed, they're like, why didn't I do this sooner? [36:23.960 --> 36:30.320] At the Sleep Number year-end close-out event, save up to $800 on selected 2011 bed sets, [36:30.320 --> 36:34.320] only at the Sleep Number store, where queen bed sets now start at just $8.99. [36:34.320 --> 36:39.880] Olay, the number one skincare brand in North America, offers its most effective anti-aging [36:39.880 --> 36:41.720] regimen to fight the look of wrinkles. [36:41.720 --> 36:46.600] Olay Professional Pro-X, developed by Olay with leading dermatologists for professional [36:46.600 --> 36:48.600] level results, guaranteed. [36:48.600 --> 36:56.080] It has been worked at a power plant where the asbestos fell like snow. [36:56.080 --> 36:59.000] My dad got mesolilioma from asbestos. [36:59.000 --> 37:02.160] Oh, the diagnosis was devastating. [37:02.160 --> 37:06.240] He chose Cooney and Conway because they're highly experienced in this area. [37:06.240 --> 37:07.640] They were more than lawyers. [37:07.640 --> 37:09.520] They were human beings. [37:09.520 --> 37:11.280] There was no money up front. [37:11.280 --> 37:14.720] It showed my sons that there is justice in the world. [37:14.720 --> 37:20.520] Call 1-800-322-5573, Cooney and Conway, Justice with a Passion. [37:20.520 --> 37:24.720] Kent Putnam here to tell you about the incredible offer at Putnam Jeep in Burlingame. [37:24.720 --> 37:31.560] Right now, Putnam is taking $5,000 off the sticker price of every new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee [37:31.560 --> 37:32.560] in stock. [37:32.560 --> 37:33.960] No games, no gimmicks. [37:33.960 --> 37:39.880] Pick your Jeep Grand Cherokee, take a look at the sticker, then take off $5,000. [37:39.880 --> 37:46.000] Plenty of new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokees in stock and Putnam is taking $5,000 off the [37:46.000 --> 37:52.320] sticker price, only at Putnam Jeep in Burlingame. [37:52.320 --> 37:56.120] In MSNBC. [37:56.120 --> 37:59.880] We are back with our political round table, joining me Republican strategist, Mike Murphy, [37:59.880 --> 38:05.520] New York Times columnist, senior political analyst Mark Halpern, columnist for the Des Moines [38:05.520 --> 38:11.600] Register, Kathy Abradovich and host of Andrea Mitchell reports on MSNBC, NBC's Andrea Mitchell. [38:11.600 --> 38:12.600] Welcome, everybody. [38:12.600 --> 38:13.600] Thanks for being here. [38:13.600 --> 38:14.600] Happy New Year. [38:14.600 --> 38:16.840] You got a great political story to dig into. [38:16.840 --> 38:22.320] Major moments of the week in Kathy Abradovich with the Des Moines Register, Iowa as a toss [38:22.320 --> 38:23.320] up. [38:23.320 --> 38:24.320] Who is going to win this thing? [38:24.320 --> 38:29.400] Boy, you know, it is a moving target right now and right now all the movement is behind [38:29.400 --> 38:31.400] Rick Santorum. [38:31.400 --> 38:37.840] Our poll, actually, the first two days that we were in the field this week had Romney and [38:37.840 --> 38:39.560] Paul neck and neck. [38:39.560 --> 38:44.640] We actually had an illustration on the front page for our paper of Romney and Paul arm [38:44.640 --> 38:45.760] wrestling. [38:45.760 --> 38:50.080] And when we came in, saw the last two days of pulling, we had to put in Rick Santorum [38:50.080 --> 38:51.080] into the picture. [38:51.080 --> 38:55.040] So he is the only candidate that is surging upward right now. [38:55.040 --> 38:58.320] Everybody else is static except Ron Paul, who is trending down. [38:58.320 --> 39:00.600] I think he peaked a week ago. [39:00.600 --> 39:06.400] Mike Murphy, you are a veteran of these parts and also of the tactics of expectations. [39:06.400 --> 39:11.680] I spoke to some Romney folks last night who actually suggested they think Santorum is [39:11.680 --> 39:13.160] going to win this thing. [39:13.160 --> 39:16.720] Are they setting us up to say, oh, what a win by Mitt Romney? [39:16.720 --> 39:19.680] Well, I think they think Santorum might win this thing. [39:19.680 --> 39:22.400] They had too easy of a life seven days ago. [39:22.400 --> 39:26.040] They had Gingrich declining and they had Ron Paul, who would be very easy to beat in the [39:26.040 --> 39:27.600] full series of caucuses. [39:27.600 --> 39:29.600] So now they've got Rick Santorum coming up fast. [39:29.600 --> 39:31.280] I think the surge is totally legitimate. [39:31.280 --> 39:32.840] Your poll shows that. [39:32.840 --> 39:36.040] And consolidating that social conservative vote, which in the past has always been the [39:36.040 --> 39:39.040] key to finishing at least second in the Iowa caucus. [39:39.040 --> 39:43.480] So I think they would love to beat Santorum, but if Santorum beats them, they're still [39:43.480 --> 39:47.400] in the top two and there's great clarity, which is, there's no way Romney comes out [39:47.400 --> 39:49.120] of here a loser if he's in the top two. [39:49.120 --> 39:52.280] But now he knows who his opponent is going to be in New Hampshire, which is not social [39:52.280 --> 39:53.920] conservative territory at all. [39:53.920 --> 39:56.200] And as they roll the process out. [39:56.200 --> 39:58.000] So I think the Romney people would like a win. [39:58.000 --> 39:59.000] I'm not sure they need one. [39:59.000 --> 40:00.320] Well, I'm not sure they think they have. [40:00.320 --> 40:03.400] Part of that analysis is, hey, Santorum's good for us. [40:03.400 --> 40:04.480] We keep it expanded. [40:04.480 --> 40:06.080] You take that field to South Carolina. [40:06.080 --> 40:07.080] He'll go after Rick Perry. [40:07.080 --> 40:10.520] If Perry can stay in the race, better for Romney. [40:10.520 --> 40:16.480] If the issue is who is the stalwart conservative, did Rick Santorum help himself this morning [40:16.480 --> 40:17.480] in the final push? [40:17.480 --> 40:20.320] I think he had some convoluted answers to two of your questions. [40:20.320 --> 40:25.280] One about his support for Romney four years ago and also on rape and incest exceptions [40:25.280 --> 40:27.560] and abortion when he was running in Pennsylvania. [40:27.560 --> 40:29.240] Right now I see two buckets of scenarios. [40:29.240 --> 40:32.240] There's scenarios that are great for Mitt Romney and there's scenarios that are really [40:32.240 --> 40:34.400] good or decent for Mitt Romney. [40:34.400 --> 40:38.760] They would love to leave here with the top three in whatever order being Paul Santorum [40:38.760 --> 40:42.360] and Romney because they believe they will never lose in the long run and maybe even [40:42.360 --> 40:45.280] the medium run to Santorum or Paul. [40:45.280 --> 40:47.800] Gingrich and Perry represent bigger threats for them. [40:47.800 --> 40:51.480] And I think the worst case for Romney is if one of those two guys surges in the last [40:51.480 --> 40:55.200] few days, no indication that will happen, but they're both out there working hard. [40:55.200 --> 40:56.600] You've been out here reporting. [40:56.600 --> 40:57.600] What are you seeing? [40:57.600 --> 41:00.320] Well, the crowds are much smaller than you'd expect. [41:00.320 --> 41:04.600] Smaller than the Huckabee crowds were four years ago, but there's that evangelical core [41:04.600 --> 41:09.040] and when we talk about organization and enthusiasm, they're going to come out. [41:09.040 --> 41:14.360] And I think that as Mark and the rest of us all noticed with you today, Santorum may [41:14.360 --> 41:19.120] have stubbed his toe a bit by you pinning him down on what he said when he was running [41:19.120 --> 41:24.840] for reelection in Pennsylvania in 2006, the exceptions that he previously agreed to. [41:24.840 --> 41:28.240] The fact that he is willing to compromise, he said not on his principles, but to get [41:28.240 --> 41:30.600] things done, a little bit convoluted. [41:30.600 --> 41:35.520] And the fact that he said he made a political decision to support Mitt Romney against John [41:35.520 --> 41:37.260] McCain, a political decision. [41:37.260 --> 41:41.720] If the crime, David Brooks is moderation in today's Republican Party, what are we learning [41:41.720 --> 41:46.800] now a couple of days away from actual voting beginning in a Republican caucus about the [41:46.800 --> 41:47.800] state of the party? [41:47.800 --> 41:51.120] Yeah, it's a pretty conservative party, but it's not, they don't want dogmatists. [41:51.120 --> 41:53.120] And I actually think Santorum helped himself today. [41:53.120 --> 41:55.360] His problem is not that he compromises too much. [41:55.360 --> 41:58.800] His problem is that people think he's too rigid and he can show that he's a practical [41:58.800 --> 41:59.800] politician. [41:59.800 --> 42:00.800] I think that's a net plus for him. [42:00.800 --> 42:03.960] You know, Iowa has produced some candidates who have not gone on to great success. [42:03.960 --> 42:05.840] How could be Pat Robertson many years ago? [42:05.840 --> 42:08.480] I don't think Rick Santorum is one of them. [42:08.480 --> 42:12.040] In part because he's got some working class credentials as opposed to Romney. [42:12.040 --> 42:16.640] In part because he tells a very good story about connecting moral concerns with the economy. [42:16.640 --> 42:19.560] And partly he's just a good politician, you know, I covered him in the Senate when he [42:19.560 --> 42:21.640] lost badly in Pennsylvania. [42:21.640 --> 42:23.480] He was a pretty bad politician. [42:23.480 --> 42:27.200] If you look at him today, like you're a baseball scout looking at a pitcher, you'd say, yeah, [42:27.200 --> 42:29.360] this guy's good enough to play in the major leagues. [42:29.360 --> 42:30.960] So I think he's going to be reasonably strong. [42:30.960 --> 42:33.960] I'm not sure he's going to win the nomination, but reasonably strong going out of him. [42:33.960 --> 42:35.960] You talked about the economic message that you think is... [42:35.960 --> 42:39.080] Yeah, no, one thing that's not being covered as much because his base is social conservatives [42:39.080 --> 42:44.120] is he's still the guy of the blue state Pennsylvania chops and he does a very good message on manufacturing [42:44.120 --> 42:47.840] jobs, which is a bell ringer in eastern Iowa, which people don't, you know, from outside [42:47.840 --> 42:50.680] Iowa don't know is a place of a lot of light manufacturing. [42:50.680 --> 42:53.400] And I make one other point about this morning, I thought he did fairly well too. [42:53.400 --> 42:56.440] He's always going to be pro-life enough, you know, for the pro-life voters. [42:56.440 --> 42:58.280] So that's not going to be his problem. [42:58.280 --> 43:02.120] But there's something else happening on Sunday morning, which is an evangelical churches [43:02.120 --> 43:04.800] across Iowa and the pulpit, they're seeing that poll. [43:04.800 --> 43:07.560] And they're saying one of our guys is moving fast. [43:07.560 --> 43:10.320] And I think the messages are going to go out that are going to be very bad for Perry, [43:10.320 --> 43:13.920] going to be very bad for what's left of Bachman to go with Rick to win this. [43:13.920 --> 43:18.040] In other words, Kylie, that social conservatives will move toward him and they'll say, that's [43:18.040 --> 43:19.040] it. [43:19.040 --> 43:20.040] That's the alternative we've been looking for. [43:20.040 --> 43:22.440] Social conservatives have been like all the other voters in Iowa. [43:22.440 --> 43:25.080] They have wanted to give everybody a try. [43:25.080 --> 43:28.400] And they are undecided and unwilling to unify. [43:28.400 --> 43:31.800] And even in our poll, they are not unified. [43:31.800 --> 43:36.280] Rick Santorum polled about 23 percent of people who describe themselves as born again. [43:36.280 --> 43:40.280] But Ron Paul and Mitt Romney each got 18 percent. [43:40.280 --> 43:41.680] So they're not united. [43:41.680 --> 43:47.800] They may indeed start moving that way in the interest of having one of them, as Mike said, [43:47.800 --> 43:48.800] at the top. [43:48.800 --> 43:50.440] But are we not this for everybody? [43:50.440 --> 43:56.080] The volatility we've seen in the polling here and who comes out of these debates. [43:56.080 --> 43:57.680] What does that tell us? [43:57.680 --> 44:02.600] Is it ultimately going to be portrayed as whether Romney can get above that 25 percent [44:02.600 --> 44:03.600] threshold? [44:03.600 --> 44:04.600] Is that not the big issue? [44:04.600 --> 44:06.360] I actually think it's a little deeper. [44:06.360 --> 44:09.120] One of the things that struck me from all the rallies I've seen out here is the sense [44:09.120 --> 44:12.040] the country has gone seriously off course. [44:12.040 --> 44:13.840] And it's a values thing. [44:13.840 --> 44:16.760] And all the campaigns are trying to tap into this saying, we've lost it. [44:16.760 --> 44:17.760] Let's restore. [44:17.760 --> 44:19.540] Let's go back to what we've lost. [44:19.540 --> 44:21.920] And you see that in the crowds when you talk to the people. [44:21.920 --> 44:23.920] But when you ask them, what do you want to do? [44:23.920 --> 44:24.920] No one has a clue. [44:24.920 --> 44:26.920] Because the polls are so difficult. [44:26.920 --> 44:32.080] And when you feel that anger, it's that wrong track number that we see. [44:32.080 --> 44:33.560] It's the anger against Washington. [44:33.560 --> 44:36.040] Ron Paul early on tapped into that. [44:36.040 --> 44:41.800] I think he really hurt himself on foreign policy and on making himself not electable. [44:41.800 --> 44:46.840] The sense in the polls that we saw starting with the polls on Wednesday, then our poll [44:46.840 --> 44:52.960] on Friday and yours today, he's just not acceptable to so many people because of his [44:52.960 --> 44:55.160] foreign policy positions. [44:55.160 --> 44:58.960] And going into South Carolina in particular, that's going to be a very big problem. [44:58.960 --> 44:59.960] My gut is an old poll. [44:59.960 --> 45:01.640] It's always been the Ron Paul things overrated. [45:01.640 --> 45:03.240] And I'll go on the dangerous prediction limit. [45:03.240 --> 45:06.400] I think he'll be the surprise disappointing finish. [45:06.400 --> 45:09.920] A lot of his function is, will new people show up at the caucus? [45:09.920 --> 45:12.120] And we always get seduced by this argument because it's so much fun. [45:12.120 --> 45:13.120] A bunch of Martians are going to land. [45:13.120 --> 45:14.880] We're going to have a Marshall. [45:14.880 --> 45:16.080] Historically new people don't. [45:16.080 --> 45:19.320] Republicans, primary voters and activists, the question is within the range. [45:19.320 --> 45:22.840] I think because of the wrong track energy and frustration, it turned out to be a little [45:22.840 --> 45:23.840] higher than last time. [45:23.840 --> 45:24.840] Not a lot. [45:24.840 --> 45:25.840] Just a little. [45:25.840 --> 45:27.840] I think the poll does show that 27% of this poll, our new caucus goes. [45:27.840 --> 45:30.400] And Barack Obama did bring new people into the caucus. [45:30.400 --> 45:33.760] I think that we've got a different electorate than we did in 2008 because the Democrats [45:33.760 --> 45:35.000] don't have a contest. [45:35.000 --> 45:40.360] So you have people who are independents in particular who want a caucus. [45:40.360 --> 45:43.360] And a lot of them are going toward Ron Paul. [45:43.360 --> 45:47.080] He is the least ideological on the social issues. [45:47.080 --> 45:52.240] And also, what we're getting is, I think, a desperation for real change. [45:52.240 --> 45:55.760] And I think a lot of those folks are flocking toward Ron Paul because he is the guy who [45:55.760 --> 45:56.760] is completely different. [45:56.760 --> 45:57.760] Maybe. [45:57.760 --> 45:59.880] I think he was a sentiment, which is what all these polls measure early. [45:59.880 --> 46:00.880] They're a noise meter. [46:00.880 --> 46:01.880] But now it's time for voting. [46:01.880 --> 46:02.880] I don't know if he's a vote. [46:02.880 --> 46:03.880] And I think he collects. [46:03.880 --> 46:05.200] Can I interject something else into this? [46:05.200 --> 46:07.520] So here's the Sunday New York Times. [46:07.520 --> 46:12.080] And the lead story is Obama's strategy for 12 election, attack Congress. [46:12.080 --> 46:16.400] Now, White House officials, I've talked to say that that was sensationalized, that that [46:16.400 --> 46:20.680] was overwritten, that, yes, the president's going to talk about contrast with Congress, [46:20.680 --> 46:24.040] but he certainly hopes and will work for cooperation. [46:24.040 --> 46:28.320] But we're beginning to see the outlines already in this contest of what the general election [46:28.320 --> 46:32.800] will look like, the general election campaign, no matter who the nominee is. [46:32.800 --> 46:35.520] Now, here was then Senator Obama. [46:35.520 --> 46:40.320] When he won in Iowa back in 2008, this is what he said in part. [46:40.320 --> 46:48.160] The time has come for a president who will be honest about the choices and the challenges [46:48.160 --> 46:55.320] we face, who will listen to you and learn from you even when we disagree, who won't [46:55.320 --> 47:01.480] just tell you what you want to hear, but what you need to know. [47:01.480 --> 47:05.880] And Mitt Romney on the campaign trail this week is actually shadowing where President [47:05.880 --> 47:10.200] Obama, then Senator Obama, campaigned in Iowa, and he's got a very different message. [47:10.200 --> 47:12.280] This is it in part. [47:12.280 --> 47:17.640] Four years ago this week, the Barack Obama visited Davenport, and he gave a speech right [47:17.640 --> 47:23.320] down the street, and like most of his campaign speeches, it was long on promises. [47:23.320 --> 47:27.880] He promised that he was going to bring people together, and then he closed his speech with [47:27.880 --> 47:28.880] these words. [47:28.880 --> 47:32.960] He says, this is our moment, this is our time. [47:32.960 --> 47:37.600] Well, Mr. President, you've had your moment. [47:37.600 --> 47:39.560] We've seen the results. [47:39.560 --> 47:43.120] And now, Mr. President, this is our time. [47:43.120 --> 47:46.720] So here's the context, Mark Halpern. [47:46.720 --> 47:51.160] I mean, the argument is that the transformational leader that President Obama was supposed to [47:51.160 --> 47:54.640] be, the truth teller, was going to tell Americans what they needed to know, not what they wanted [47:54.640 --> 47:57.200] to know, that that leader has failed to show. [47:57.200 --> 48:01.320] It's clearly the strongest message any Republican can have, and Mitt Romney has driven it better [48:01.320 --> 48:03.040] than anyone else in the field. [48:03.040 --> 48:08.400] He also has run by every metric you can use to judge a campaign, fundraising, opposition [48:08.400 --> 48:12.560] research, tactics, strategy, far and away the best campaign of anyone in the race. [48:12.560 --> 48:13.840] And the White House is ready for him. [48:13.840 --> 48:18.280] Last night, New Year's Eve, right, Romney, in a late-day event, says he would veto the [48:18.280 --> 48:22.760] Dream Act, giving more opportunity to immigrants to this country. [48:22.760 --> 48:24.560] The White House jumped on that. [48:24.560 --> 48:28.480] New Year's Eve, David Axelrod, the president's advisor, tweeting about it, DNC putting out [48:28.480 --> 48:29.600] a press release. [48:29.600 --> 48:31.080] They are very aggressive. [48:31.080 --> 48:32.520] They are very skilled. [48:32.520 --> 48:36.200] If you're looking for electability, though, again, the only operation out there right [48:36.200 --> 48:40.320] now that's got anything like the potential to have the scale that the president will [48:40.320 --> 48:41.880] bring to this is Mitt Romney. [48:41.880 --> 48:43.640] I would say he's at the organizational scale. [48:43.640 --> 48:46.040] His events are like big aircraft carriers. [48:46.040 --> 48:48.080] I have a little problem with the messaging, though. [48:48.080 --> 48:49.240] Here it's all patriotism. [48:49.240 --> 48:50.240] It's Tom Sawyer. [48:50.240 --> 48:51.240] I love America. [48:51.240 --> 48:52.520] I used to drive through a lot of national parks. [48:52.520 --> 48:53.520] You love America. [48:53.520 --> 48:57.080] And the subtext is, you know, you might think I'm a rich guy with a strange religion, but [48:57.080 --> 48:58.240] I'm just like you. [48:58.240 --> 49:02.680] I actually think that's probably not enough to win in a country where people feel it's [49:02.680 --> 49:06.920] in decline, that the scope of his plans are not as big as the scope of the problem. [49:06.920 --> 49:08.400] It's a problem that also applies to Barack Obama. [49:08.400 --> 49:10.160] But it's enough for this week, though, right? [49:10.160 --> 49:11.160] Potentially. [49:11.160 --> 49:12.160] Potentially, yeah. [49:12.160 --> 49:13.160] And the president is not going to be silent, also. [49:13.160 --> 49:14.160] Right. [49:14.160 --> 49:19.560] Well, Andrea, take that on, because this is a big issue about whether President Obama [49:19.560 --> 49:21.440] has measured up as a leader. [49:21.440 --> 49:27.160] I mean, there's real fears of national decline, a sense that the country's on the wrong track. [49:27.160 --> 49:30.960] This is a campaign about big things, ultimately, for voters. [49:30.960 --> 49:32.960] And the president is trying to respond to that. [49:32.960 --> 49:36.680] He's actually doing a video message to all of the Democratic caucus goers. [49:36.680 --> 49:38.960] He wants to be present in some fashion. [49:38.960 --> 49:44.440] So he is going to have Democratic caucusing with a presidential message by video. [49:44.440 --> 49:47.800] But the point is that he has not yet found a way. [49:47.800 --> 49:49.240] He has not found his voice. [49:49.240 --> 49:54.000] And they say that the New York Times story is overwritten that he's running against Congress. [49:54.000 --> 49:56.320] That has worked for him in the payroll tax fight. [49:56.320 --> 49:59.760] But he still has to find that message for the State of the Union, for whatever his next [49:59.760 --> 50:04.280] platform is going to be, that is obviously the next one, to tell people how the country [50:04.280 --> 50:09.560] can be better at a time where his only economic message can be it's not as bad as it could [50:09.560 --> 50:10.840] have been. [50:10.840 --> 50:11.840] It's better than it was. [50:11.840 --> 50:13.520] And the Republicans will make it worse. [50:13.520 --> 50:14.520] They'll take you back. [50:14.520 --> 50:17.840] Yeah, I think, off David's point, there's a really interesting question from Mitt Romney [50:17.840 --> 50:18.840] next week. [50:18.840 --> 50:20.880] I think it's highly likely Stanton will come out here for a lot of energy. [50:20.880 --> 50:21.880] I don't mean second or first. [50:21.880 --> 50:24.680] But it'll settle down to that'll be what the media wants. [50:24.680 --> 50:25.680] So it'll be the race. [50:25.680 --> 50:27.200] And Rick will come at it from the right, particularly the social right. [50:27.200 --> 50:29.600] If you're running the Romney campaign, you've got a choice. [50:29.600 --> 50:32.280] You'll either just grind it out and have a contest on the right. [50:32.280 --> 50:35.440] You say you're pro-life, gay marriage, I say I'm pro-life. [50:35.440 --> 50:38.680] The White House is going to be giggling for three months at that. [50:38.680 --> 50:41.560] Or do you know you've got the organizational strength and the depth? [50:41.560 --> 50:44.680] Stanton, it'll be like drinking from a fire hose for him to try to catch up if he comes [50:44.680 --> 50:45.940] out of here. [50:45.940 --> 50:47.160] Do you triangulate a little bit? [50:47.160 --> 50:49.120] Do you take a few risks in the primary? [50:49.120 --> 50:52.240] But do you bounce off Stanton to grab the middle again, which is a much better general [50:52.240 --> 50:53.240] election strategy? [50:53.240 --> 50:54.240] It's a little risky in a primary. [50:54.240 --> 50:59.080] I want to get back to tactics in just a second, but David Brooks, stay on this larger theme, [50:59.080 --> 51:03.280] which is the White House, I talked to senior advisors and say look, we can win the broader [51:03.280 --> 51:05.800] vision of where the country is going and where it should go. [51:05.800 --> 51:08.280] We can win independent voters on that message. [51:08.280 --> 51:11.640] What is the vision that we're learning about of this Republican Party? [51:11.640 --> 51:13.800] Well it's a vision that thinks the government is too big. [51:13.800 --> 51:15.720] It's become the government party. [51:15.720 --> 51:19.400] And the thing which I think Santorum brings to the table, which the others don't talk [51:19.400 --> 51:22.520] about as well, is community and values. [51:22.520 --> 51:26.120] He really, he was a big anti-poverty guy when he was in the Congress. [51:26.120 --> 51:29.560] He really talks about families and ties that to business a little better. [51:29.560 --> 51:34.880] That's been lacking from what has become a very libertarian, anti-tax, economics-only [51:34.880 --> 51:35.880] party. [51:35.880 --> 51:38.040] And it is in danger of reverting back into that sort of thing. [51:38.040 --> 51:41.560] So Kathy, what are the storylines that come out of Tuesday as you see them? [51:41.560 --> 51:43.440] Well I think that there's a couple things. [51:43.440 --> 51:47.680] One that we're very interested in here in Iowa is just how are the Iowa caucuses viewed [51:47.680 --> 51:48.680] nationally. [51:48.680 --> 51:51.520] And the results here will feed into that discussion. [51:51.520 --> 51:56.560] It does somebody come out of Iowa that people perceive has very little chance of being the [51:56.560 --> 51:59.160] nominee like Ron Paul or Rick Santorum. [51:59.160 --> 52:03.000] That's something that we're worried about and some Republicans are worried about that. [52:03.000 --> 52:09.360] And finally, I think that the question then is how do the conservatives fare in the future [52:09.360 --> 52:10.360] here in Iowa? [52:10.360 --> 52:11.760] Mark Halpern? [52:11.760 --> 52:15.840] Every time that Romney's been challenged in this process, his very well-skilled opposition [52:15.840 --> 52:18.880] research team has killed the person who's challenged them. [52:18.880 --> 52:19.880] They killed Rick Perry. [52:19.880 --> 52:20.880] They killed New Kingers. [52:20.880 --> 52:23.000] They even lifted a finger to kill Rick Santorum. [52:23.000 --> 52:26.040] And if he does come out of here and it's Mike's right, it's perceived at least in the short [52:26.040 --> 52:29.960] term as a two-person race, he may not have to choose between triangulation and competing [52:29.960 --> 52:30.960] on the right. [52:30.960 --> 52:34.640] They may just tactically kill Rick Santorum with an opposition research file that's like [52:34.640 --> 52:35.640] this. [52:35.640 --> 52:36.640] That's what I predict will happen. [52:36.640 --> 52:38.360] And then the question will be, can Santorum survive that? [52:38.360 --> 52:40.840] Does he have the skill and the ability to fight back? [52:40.840 --> 52:42.280] Because he won't have the infrastructure. [52:42.280 --> 52:43.520] He won't have the money. [52:43.520 --> 52:46.680] As he's talked about with you, he won't have the big endorsements and the people backing [52:46.680 --> 52:47.680] him to help. [52:47.680 --> 52:52.800] They've spent almost $17 million spent in blanketing the airwaves here in Iowa. [52:52.800 --> 52:55.960] These outside groups, these super PACs are pounding. [52:55.960 --> 52:59.400] And they did it without Romney having to lift a finger. [52:59.400 --> 53:02.960] And the fact that Romney is not perceived, there is no blowback as there has been in [53:02.960 --> 53:08.720] past campaigns because of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, which now has opened [53:08.720 --> 53:14.080] the door for these super PACs to come in and they just killed Gingrich, just pummeled him. [53:14.080 --> 53:20.200] I don't think that he might not have self-destructed anyway, but they just went after him hammering [53:20.200 --> 53:22.400] Tongue and Mitt Romney doesn't get the blame. [53:22.400 --> 53:25.120] Santorum is good for Mitt Romney right now. [53:25.120 --> 53:28.240] The minute he's no longer good for him, the super PACs will shift their focus. [53:28.240 --> 53:30.240] What's the storyline Wednesday morning that we're covering? [53:30.240 --> 53:33.160] Who the hell is Santorum? [53:33.160 --> 53:34.160] But there's a point about this. [53:34.160 --> 53:35.160] It's not just the super PACs. [53:35.160 --> 53:38.720] It's easier to crush a guy with negative ads in one state than in ten. [53:38.720 --> 53:42.120] Santorum is, I think, a lot more competitive than Ron Paul would be. [53:42.120 --> 53:43.120] But it's the media. [53:43.120 --> 53:46.920] The media works like the Jurassic Park dinosaurs, thirty feet tall, huge teeth, with all due [53:46.920 --> 53:49.920] respect, not always the biggest brain, and it follows movement. [53:49.920 --> 53:54.320] And when it sees movement, Rick Santorum stomps over there and tries to eat Rick Santorum, [53:54.320 --> 53:55.680] and that's what next week is going to be like. [53:55.680 --> 53:58.160] He's going to be the happiest guy in the world, I think, Tuesday night. [53:58.160 --> 54:02.120] Wednesday, he's got a stand in his head, drink from a fire hose without drowning, and learn [54:02.120 --> 54:04.880] Chinese in one week to roll this thing out nationally. [54:04.880 --> 54:05.880] Not impossible. [54:05.880 --> 54:07.960] He's going to be hard, and he's going to get looked at hard. [54:07.960 --> 54:11.600] One of the weird things, I mean, Mike thinks we have small brains, but Rick Santorum really [54:11.600 --> 54:15.480] hates us sometimes, and when Santorum ran a bad campaign, which he did when he tried [54:15.480 --> 54:18.840] to get reelected in Pennsylvania, it's because he got obsessed with the media. [54:18.840 --> 54:21.960] He got very sour, and then he's self-destructed. [54:21.960 --> 54:24.120] And we'll see how temperamentally he reacts to this sort of thing. [54:24.120 --> 54:27.520] Where does this thing get decided, Andrea? [54:27.520 --> 54:32.560] It could get decided in South Carolina or Florida, if not sooner. [54:32.560 --> 54:36.640] Let's look at the calendar to remind people where we go as we move forward. [54:36.640 --> 54:43.000] Tuesday, of course, the Iowa caucuses, New Hampshire primary is January 10th. [54:43.000 --> 54:48.320] The following Tuesday, January 21st is South Carolina, January 31st, Florida. [54:48.320 --> 54:50.600] Mark, this is a busy January. [54:50.600 --> 54:55.560] Does this auger for it being wrapped up in January, or does it become a drawn-out 2008 [54:55.560 --> 54:56.560] like affair? [54:56.560 --> 55:01.920] Unless someone can beat Mitt Romney in one of the first four or two of the first four, [55:01.920 --> 55:04.240] I think it's wrapped up by the State of the Union. [55:04.240 --> 55:07.720] If he's caught and he shows a lot of weakness, that's a different story. [55:07.720 --> 55:10.400] But there's no indication of that right now. [55:10.400 --> 55:15.200] If he wins New Hampshire and he wins Florida, that's a neckbreaker on everybody else. [55:15.200 --> 55:18.320] Not impossible to win the delegate count is later, but I think he is a commanding front [55:18.320 --> 55:20.680] runner today after the Florida primary if he has a strong victory. [55:20.680 --> 55:23.160] How vulnerable is President Obama? [55:23.160 --> 55:24.160] He's vulnerable. [55:24.160 --> 55:27.160] I'd say he's now a slight underdog, very slight. [55:27.160 --> 55:28.160] The economy is going to be terrible. [55:28.160 --> 55:29.920] Who knows what's going to happen to Europe? [55:29.920 --> 55:30.920] So he's vulnerable. [55:30.920 --> 55:32.840] He doesn't have the strongest opposition in the world. [55:32.840 --> 55:34.840] Kathy, you're on the ground here in Iowa. [55:34.840 --> 55:36.160] Who's going to win this thing? [55:36.160 --> 55:38.280] You know, I can't predict it. [55:38.280 --> 55:41.760] It's too fast-moving, but I will predict that a lot of people are going to make up their [55:41.760 --> 55:45.640] mind on caucus night, and very well, it could be a surprise. [55:45.640 --> 55:46.640] All right. [55:46.640 --> 55:47.640] We'll leave it there. [55:47.640 --> 55:48.640] Thank you all very much. [55:48.640 --> 55:53.160] Before we go, a programming note next Sunday morning is our live NBC News Facebook Republican [55:53.160 --> 55:58.240] presidential debate right here on Meet the Press, the final debate before the New Hampshire [55:58.240 --> 55:59.240] primary. [55:59.240 --> 56:02.560] For the past month, we've been asking New Hampshire Facebook users what the most important [56:02.560 --> 56:05.640] issue is primary and overwhelming majority. [56:05.640 --> 56:09.200] As you might suspect, 58% say it is, in fact, the economy. [56:09.200 --> 56:13.480] So if you have a question you'd like asked in the debate, go to our Facebook page. [56:13.480 --> 56:17.760] That's at facebook.com slash Meet the Press, and you can post it there. [56:17.760 --> 56:18.760] That is all for today. [56:18.760 --> 56:22.360] I'll be on the ground here in Iowa through the caucuses and then on to New Hampshire reporting [56:22.360 --> 56:23.360] on the primary. [56:23.360 --> 56:27.360] We'll be back next week with our live presidential candidate debate. [56:27.360 --> 56:37.000] If it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press. [56:37.000 --> 56:41.640] Right now, it's buy one, get one free on everything in the store, including big and [56:41.640 --> 56:42.640] tall sizes. [56:42.640 --> 56:46.200] You're going to like the way you look, I guarantee it. [56:46.200 --> 56:48.000] I have a cold. [56:48.000 --> 56:50.160] I took Dayquel, but my nose is so runny. [56:50.160 --> 56:52.080] Truth is, Dayquel doesn't treat that. [56:52.080 --> 56:53.080] Really? [56:53.080 --> 56:56.600] Alka-Seltzer Plus fights your worst cold symptoms, plus it relieves your runny nose. [56:56.600 --> 56:57.600] Awesome. [56:57.600 --> 56:58.600] Yes, it is. [56:58.600 --> 57:01.600] That's the cold truth. [57:01.600 --> 57:03.920] Who is NutriSystem Success for? [57:03.920 --> 57:08.080] If you're tired of being overweight, if you're getting into shape for the first time or you [57:08.080 --> 57:12.320] need to get back into shape and stay in shape, get on it. [57:12.320 --> 57:17.200] Introducing new NutriSystem Success, our most complete program ever, designed to take the [57:17.200 --> 57:19.960] weight off and help keep it off. [57:19.960 --> 57:26.400] The reason NutriSystem Success works, it gives you exactly what you need. [57:26.400 --> 57:31.920] NutriSystem Success offers over 130 delicious food choices and quality nutrition delivered [57:31.920 --> 57:33.420] to your door. [57:33.420 --> 57:35.440] There is a secret to success. [57:35.440 --> 57:38.760] You can't wish for what you want, hope for what you want. [57:38.760 --> 57:42.360] You have to have a plan, and then you have to get on it. [57:42.360 --> 57:46.600] I have a message for anyone who has ever struggled with weight loss. [57:46.600 --> 57:49.160] Make NutriSystem Success your plan. [57:49.160 --> 57:51.600] I'm on it, and I've already seen results. [57:51.600 --> 57:56.480] Order now to get special introductory pricing, and our new chef's table entree is free, plus [57:56.480 --> 57:59.480] save 20% on your entire order. [57:59.480 --> 58:25.480] I'm on it. [58:25.480 --> 58:42.520] I'm on it. [58:42.520 --> 58:47.200] Indulge all you want, now there's no need to hold back. [58:47.200 --> 58:52.040] New revolutionary scope dual blast obliterates strong food odors leaving your bread minty [58:52.040 --> 58:55.720] fresh, so there's no trace of leavening. [58:55.720 --> 58:58.720] New scope dual blast. [58:58.720 --> 59:03.640] What is it about taking a first step that we find so compelling? [59:03.640 --> 59:07.960] Is it because taking a step represents hope? [59:07.960 --> 59:11.320] Or triumph? [59:11.320 --> 59:16.600] At Genworth, we believe in taking small steps every day to keep your promises, protect what [59:16.600 --> 59:20.200] matters, and prepare for a secure financial future. [59:20.200 --> 59:24.640] No matter where you want to go, one step at a time is the only way to get there. [59:24.640 --> 59:27.200] Go to genworth.com promises. [59:27.200 --> 59:31.080] Whoa, this is not the number we talked about. [59:31.080 --> 59:32.560] That's our phone number. [59:32.560 --> 59:35.800] No surprise pricing is one thing that makes Pearl Vision different, and here's something [59:35.800 --> 59:36.800] else. [59:36.800 --> 59:39.960] Buy a pair of eyeglasses or prescription sunglasses, and we'll give you another pair, free. [59:39.960 --> 59:53.360] Visit pearlvision.com for a store near you. [59:53.360 --> 59:57.280] Don't our dogs deserve to eat fresher, less processed foods? [59:57.280 --> 59:58.440] Just like we do? [59:58.440 --> 01:00:10.280] Introducing FreshPet.