Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language Detected language: English [00:00.000 --> 00:17.040] This Sunday, live from Des Moines on this New Year's Day, just 40 hours before the Iowa [00:17.040 --> 00:22.040] caucuses, the official start of this presidential election year. [00:22.040 --> 00:27.500] Senator Rick Santorum surges in the closing days, but will it be enough to buy him a ticket [00:27.500 --> 00:28.900] out of the Hawkeye State? [00:28.900 --> 00:33.500] Iowa provides the spark, this plenty of tinder on the ground that will start burning [00:33.500 --> 00:35.300] in these other states. [00:35.300 --> 00:39.340] Senator Santorum here with us for an exclusive interview this morning. [00:39.340 --> 00:44.260] Meanwhile, Mitt Ronny is trying to keep his spot at top of polls as he makes his final [00:44.260 --> 00:45.620] push. [00:45.620 --> 00:52.340] This is an election not only to replace a president, it's an election to save the soul of America. [00:52.340 --> 00:57.660] And New King Rich still losing some support, but will his emotional moment in Iowa humanized [00:57.660 --> 01:07.180] him to voters, but fulfilling with the real problems of real people in my family. [01:07.180 --> 01:12.340] And so it's not a theory, it's in fact, you know, my mother will break down the state [01:12.340 --> 01:17.020] of the race and the impact of the caucuses with the chairman of Iowa's Republican Party [01:17.020 --> 01:23.140] Matt Strong and NBC News political director Chuck Taw, plus full analysis from our political [01:23.140 --> 01:28.260] roundtable, columnist for the Des Moines Register, Kathy O'Broddvich, Republican strategist [01:28.260 --> 01:33.740] Mike Murphy, New York Times, columnist David Brooks, time magazine, senior political [01:33.740 --> 01:47.260] analyst Mark Halpring, and host of Andrea Mitchell reports, NBC's Andrea Mitchell. [01:47.260 --> 01:58.940] From the Moine Iowa, this is a special edition of Beat the Press with David Gregory. [01:58.940 --> 01:59.940] Good morning. [01:59.940 --> 02:00.940] Here we go. [02:00.940 --> 02:05.740] The presidential race of 2012 is about to officially begin as the voting starts here in Iowa [02:05.740 --> 02:06.740] on Tuesday. [02:06.740 --> 02:11.260] And here's how the race looks this morning with the Des Moines Register poll showing a [02:11.260 --> 02:16.900] three-way race now with Ronny leading Ron Paul by two points and Rick Santorum with [02:16.900 --> 02:17.900] the late surge. [02:17.900 --> 02:23.180] We will talk to Santorum about his surprise momentum in the race in just a couple of moments, [02:23.180 --> 02:27.620] but first we have with us NBC's political director Chuck Tawd and the chairman of Iowa's [02:27.620 --> 02:29.620] Republican Party Matt Strong. [02:29.620 --> 02:30.620] Welcome to both of you. [02:30.620 --> 02:31.620] Good morning. [02:31.620 --> 02:32.620] Happy New Year. [02:32.620 --> 02:33.620] Good morning. [02:33.620 --> 02:34.620] Welcome back. [02:34.620 --> 02:35.620] Thank you. [02:35.620 --> 02:36.620] So Chuck Tawd, partner. [02:36.620 --> 02:37.620] Where are we this morning? [02:37.620 --> 02:40.660] Well, I think we're trying to figure out this, is what are Iowa caucuses going to do? [02:40.660 --> 02:41.660] What are these Republicans? [02:41.660 --> 02:44.220] Are they going to come into these caucuses Tuesday night and pick a president? [02:44.220 --> 02:47.940] Are they going to do what they've done in the past, which is send a message and win [02:47.940 --> 02:48.940] of the field. [02:48.940 --> 02:53.580] If they come in and a lot of them want to pick a president, Matt Romney is going to win. [02:53.580 --> 02:54.900] Turn out's going to go up. [02:54.900 --> 02:58.460] You're going to see the casual voters show up and that's good for Romney. [02:58.460 --> 03:05.780] If it's the old style sort of the activists that show up, I think Santorum has enough momentum, [03:05.780 --> 03:10.100] it was a little bit of a wild card here in Rick Perry, but then Santorum does get out [03:10.100 --> 03:11.500] of here with some momentum. [03:11.500 --> 03:13.580] And I think that that's what we don't know. [03:13.580 --> 03:17.980] But let me stick with Santorum with you Chuck, if you look inside the numbers of the poll, [03:17.980 --> 03:22.820] the last couple of days when they were in the field talking to folks, this is what you see [03:22.820 --> 03:27.660] that Santorum is actually in 21 percent because in those last two days his numbers actually [03:27.660 --> 03:29.940] shoot up 6 percent. [03:29.940 --> 03:34.820] So if you're measuring intensity and not looking at the full range of the poll, but just [03:34.820 --> 03:38.260] the last couple of days you see Santorum has really got that buzz. [03:38.260 --> 03:40.260] And that was the big thing out of the NBC marriage poll. [03:40.260 --> 03:43.180] And if you look at both polls together, you can almost see they sort of fit together [03:43.180 --> 03:47.580] and you see this and it was Santorum and Ron Paul, for instance, had much more intensity [03:47.580 --> 03:48.580] than Romney. [03:48.580 --> 03:52.900] In fact, Rick Perry had more intense support in our poll than Mitt Romney did. [03:52.900 --> 03:54.220] And that's the Romney problem. [03:54.220 --> 03:59.740] He's got the, well, I guess I'm going to be for Romney voter, but does that person show [03:59.740 --> 04:00.740] up? [04:00.740 --> 04:01.740] And that's what we don't know. [04:01.740 --> 04:05.100] So Matt Strong, you're the chairman of the party here in the state. [04:05.100 --> 04:06.100] And this is important. [04:06.100 --> 04:09.580] I mean, this is the first voting in the presidential campaign. [04:09.580 --> 04:12.860] What's the mindset of an Iowa Republican going into this caucus? [04:12.860 --> 04:15.940] Well, I think the other key takeaway, not just in the NBC marriage poll, but in the [04:15.940 --> 04:19.940] DeWayn register poll this morning is the fact that two out of every five caucus floors [04:19.940 --> 04:22.300] could still change their mind between now and caucus day. [04:22.300 --> 04:24.100] And I think it gets a lot of volatility. [04:24.100 --> 04:25.100] It is. [04:25.100 --> 04:27.180] And it's moved from three out of five, which it was just a couple of weeks ago. [04:27.180 --> 04:31.940] And I think that's the juxtaposition between the desire to beat Barack Obama, but also making [04:31.940 --> 04:35.980] sure that we have an nominee that can aggressively articulate the Republican principled [04:35.980 --> 04:37.940] conservative message going into a general election. [04:37.940 --> 04:42.540] Well, so what's more important, because we've seen Santorum's latest ad is really about [04:42.540 --> 04:43.540] electability. [04:43.540 --> 04:48.060] I can beat Barack Obama, but for the breadth of the campaigning in Iowa, it's been, who's [04:48.060 --> 04:49.060] the true conservative? [04:49.060 --> 04:53.580] Has there been a change because there hasn't been a love affair among voters with [04:53.580 --> 04:56.620] Mitt Romney who's been the front runner throughout most of this contest? [04:56.620 --> 04:59.900] But I think the first thing you see when you talk to any Iowa Republican is that desire to [04:59.900 --> 05:04.140] beat Barack Obama, because we understand that we can afford former years in Obama administration [05:04.140 --> 05:07.540] that is hostile to our party's values and our principles. [05:07.540 --> 05:11.020] And that's the tension while you still have two out of every five Iowa caucus courts [05:11.020 --> 05:12.900] have not yet made a decision. [05:12.900 --> 05:15.260] And that's really going to get down to on Tuesday night. [05:15.260 --> 05:18.780] You always hear the mantra, organization, organization, organization. [05:18.780 --> 05:23.340] The organized campaign is going to have someone in each of those 1774 precincts to make [05:23.340 --> 05:27.500] the case, not only why can't it can be Barack Obama, but why they have the principles [05:27.500 --> 05:29.660] of our party to carry the banner going into the general. [05:29.660 --> 05:31.540] You know, remember what happens on Tuesday night. [05:31.540 --> 05:34.300] There's a set of speeches that happened before the actual vote. [05:34.300 --> 05:37.580] And I think that that is why, for instance, Rick Santorum is making an electability [05:37.580 --> 05:38.580] argument. [05:38.580 --> 05:41.420] The problem, he himself said he was running into. [05:41.420 --> 05:42.420] We agree with you. [05:42.420 --> 05:47.220] He fits the Iowa Republican caucus electorate better, frankly, than any of these candidates. [05:47.220 --> 05:51.860] Better than Rick Perry without all of the baggage that he accumulated himself, better [05:51.860 --> 05:52.860] than a new King Rich. [05:52.860 --> 05:57.060] He fits it, the social conservative values that have very strong inside the Iowa Republican [05:57.060 --> 05:58.060] party. [05:58.060 --> 06:00.740] But he said himself, people would come up to him, but I don't think you can win. [06:00.740 --> 06:04.540] Not only, I don't even think you can go on to other states, well, he's got to make [06:04.540 --> 06:06.180] that case at the end. [06:06.180 --> 06:09.860] And if he does, he's got the biggest, he's got the most room to grow here. [06:09.860 --> 06:14.940] And that's why he, on paper, yes, Romney's ahead, I think it wouldn't surprise anybody [06:14.940 --> 06:17.420] if Santorum is the one that comes out of here with the actual victory. [06:17.420 --> 06:19.260] Chuck, talk about the volatility a little bit. [06:19.260 --> 06:20.620] Has we been covering this? [06:20.620 --> 06:24.060] Anybody you talked to about the race is still shaking their head about, wait a minute, [06:24.060 --> 06:25.060] I thought there was Bachman. [06:25.060 --> 06:26.060] And then there was Perry. [06:26.060 --> 06:27.460] And then there was Herman Kane. [06:27.460 --> 06:28.620] And then there was King Rich. [06:28.620 --> 06:29.620] And now he's falling back. [06:29.620 --> 06:30.620] What's going on? [06:30.620 --> 06:31.620] It's about Mitt Romney. [06:31.620 --> 06:36.100] Mitt Romney is not viewed as conservative enough for where this Republican party is today. [06:36.100 --> 06:37.660] He's been trying to do this. [06:37.660 --> 06:40.860] We did a little word search on the word conservative with Mitt Romney. [06:40.860 --> 06:44.620] And in the first half of his campaign, he didn't even use the word very often. [06:44.620 --> 06:48.540] In the last six weeks, he talks about it all the time, tries to say, I am a conservative. [06:48.540 --> 06:52.660] I'm, you know, and he talks about the electability, but that has been, that has ultimately [06:52.660 --> 06:53.660] the issue. [06:53.660 --> 06:57.860] We still have 75% of it, likely, of the Iowa Republican caucus electorate. [06:57.860 --> 06:59.820] That's going to vote for somebody else. [06:59.820 --> 07:02.340] You know, that's still a challenge from Romney. [07:02.340 --> 07:06.740] And I think that it may be what some activists here in Iowa decide to do is, hey, we're [07:06.740 --> 07:10.620] going to, we got to force Mitt Romney to keep proving as conservative credentials. [07:10.620 --> 07:13.860] To say, you've got to, you're not going to end this early. [07:13.860 --> 07:15.900] You've got to go out there and earn the conservative vote. [07:15.900 --> 07:16.900] Now, what about turnout? [07:16.900 --> 07:18.500] Because this is a big key. [07:18.500 --> 07:22.060] Bigger turnout, presumably better for Romney, because a lot of strategists I've talked [07:22.060 --> 07:27.420] to say, those could be moderates, those could be independence, even Democrats who come out [07:27.420 --> 07:32.300] and say, no, we don't want a Santorum of a Bachman or Paul doing that well. [07:32.300 --> 07:34.900] We don't want to represent Iowa that way we want to go with Romney. [07:34.900 --> 07:39.140] Well, I think one thing you see, in 2008, we had a record turnout with just under 120,000 [07:39.140 --> 07:40.140] Iowa Republicans. [07:40.140 --> 07:44.420] And in that four-year span since then, we've had 33 straight months of Republican registration [07:44.420 --> 07:45.420] gains here in Iowa. [07:45.420 --> 07:48.620] So, we've got about 30,000 more Iowa Republicans. [07:48.620 --> 07:52.700] We had the second largest attendance we saw ever at the Australian government August. [07:52.700 --> 07:56.100] And it's the first chance anybody in the country gets to vote to start the process [07:56.100 --> 07:57.380] to replace Barack Obama. [07:57.380 --> 08:01.380] So, I would be surprised if we didn't have a strong turnout Tuesday night and with [08:01.380 --> 08:04.700] a good weather for those senior citizens, when you look at the poll results, Mitt Romney [08:04.700 --> 08:07.700] does the best with 60 and older voters. [08:07.700 --> 08:11.020] So, I think we are set up to have a strong turnout and people do need to remember in the [08:11.020 --> 08:14.860] Iowa caucuses as an independent or Democrat, you can register as a Republican that night [08:14.860 --> 08:15.860] and participate. [08:15.860 --> 08:16.860] He's making a pitch there. [08:16.860 --> 08:17.860] See? [08:17.860 --> 08:20.740] But higher to the more this is a primary, the better this is. [08:20.740 --> 08:25.580] If this were a primary and there were no speeches that night before you voted, Mitt Romney [08:25.580 --> 08:26.740] would win by 10 points. [08:26.740 --> 08:30.140] So, we always have this debate about Iowa, but it's more intense now. [08:30.140 --> 08:36.740] You know, the history of the Iowa caucuses retail campaigning, a real chance to interact [08:36.740 --> 08:38.060] with voters one-on-one. [08:38.060 --> 08:42.060] The truth of the matter is that it's a lot like big-time politics everywhere else now. [08:42.060 --> 08:48.780] More than $16 million of TV advertising, blanketing the airways so much of it negative. [08:48.780 --> 08:52.420] And here was the headline of the Wall Street Journal editorial on Tuesday. [08:52.420 --> 08:56.180] It was as Iowa goes, so goes Iowa. [08:56.180 --> 09:01.300] Yale Collins piling on in the New York Times on Thursday, writing, feel free to ignore Iowa. [09:01.300 --> 09:04.700] The Republicans hope to get more than 100,000 participants. [09:04.700 --> 09:07.700] That's about the same number of people in Pomona, California. [09:07.700 --> 09:11.140] Imagine your reaction to seeing a story saying that a plurality of people in Pomona thought [09:11.140 --> 09:13.740] New King would be the best U.P. presidential candidate. [09:13.740 --> 09:18.780] Would you say, wow, I guess New is now the front runner, possibly not, not from the Los Angeles [09:18.780 --> 09:19.780] area. [09:19.780 --> 09:23.740] So, I don't like anybody picking on Pomona Earth. [09:23.740 --> 09:26.340] But is Iowa going to pick the president? [09:26.340 --> 09:29.380] Well, listen, this is the quad-ready attack on the Hawkeye State. [09:29.380 --> 09:33.580] And I think I was representative if you look at the last four national presidential elections, [09:33.580 --> 09:37.180] I was popular vote who's mirrored what has happened nationally, and he also have to think [09:37.180 --> 09:38.860] what our role in the process is. [09:38.860 --> 09:39.860] We're first. [09:39.860 --> 09:40.860] We're not last. [09:40.860 --> 09:41.860] We're not the Decider. [09:41.860 --> 09:45.220] We start winnowing the field, but the one thing you can't discount, though, is there [09:45.220 --> 09:48.620] very few things the last two presidents of the United States have in common? [09:48.620 --> 09:51.500] But their path, the White House did start by winning the Iowa caucuses. [09:51.500 --> 09:55.220] Final point here, Chuck, he's to Tuesday, what are you looking for in the next couple [09:55.220 --> 09:56.220] of days? [09:56.220 --> 09:57.220] Wow. [09:57.220 --> 09:58.220] To me, it's the Rick Perry number. [09:58.220 --> 09:59.220] He is the wild card here. [09:59.220 --> 10:03.020] Newt, I think we clearly know Gingrich is on his way down, and he may not, frankly, may [10:03.020 --> 10:05.300] end up in single digits before it's all set and done. [10:05.300 --> 10:08.540] So, this little boom lead of his, an amazing rise and fall. [10:08.540 --> 10:09.940] But what happens to the Perry supported? [10:09.940 --> 10:14.020] Does the Perry supporter that walks in on caucus tonight, who is also a social conservative? [10:14.020 --> 10:15.220] Do they stick with him? [10:15.220 --> 10:16.820] How committed to him are they? [10:16.820 --> 10:21.180] Or do they end up buying the Santorum argument that says, you know, I'm the [10:21.180 --> 10:25.220] conservative, that can come out of here, that can win, that can keep going on. [10:25.220 --> 10:27.340] And where that, where that, what happens to that? [10:27.340 --> 10:30.100] And by the way, Mitt Romney, he needs a strong work, Perry. [10:30.100 --> 10:33.620] He can need his work, Perry, just strong enough so that Perry will go to South Carolina [10:33.620 --> 10:34.620] and won't get out of there. [10:34.620 --> 10:37.740] Does the field narrow after the results here? [10:37.740 --> 10:42.340] Well, I think it will narrow in the actual, does the actual playing field narrow? [10:42.340 --> 10:43.340] Maybe by one candidate. [10:43.340 --> 10:44.620] Maybe a Bachman ends up getting out. [10:44.620 --> 10:46.740] Newt has no incentive to get out. [10:46.740 --> 10:48.220] Perry, let's see what he does. [10:48.220 --> 10:51.940] If Perry is at 15, he stays in, he goes on to South Carolina. [10:51.940 --> 10:56.620] If he's closer to 10, I think then, he may pack it in. [10:56.620 --> 11:00.420] That's not good for Mitt Romney, by the way, he needs a few more conservatives to hang around [11:00.420 --> 11:01.420] so he can steal South Carolina. [11:01.420 --> 11:02.420] I'll leave it there. [11:02.420 --> 11:03.420] Chuck Todd, Matt Strong. [11:03.420 --> 11:04.900] Thank you both very much. [11:04.900 --> 11:09.220] We're going to turn now to a man who has been making a late surge here in Iowa, former [11:09.220 --> 11:12.500] two-term senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum. [11:12.500 --> 11:16.900] Santorum is spent more time in Iowa than any other candidate. [11:16.900 --> 11:20.260] Martin was the first to visit all 99 counties in the state. [11:20.260 --> 11:24.380] With limited resources and money and staff, he's been traveling from event to event in [11:24.380 --> 11:26.180] a pickup truck. [11:26.180 --> 11:30.700] Earlier this week, a CNN time poll showed him for the first time in the top three. [11:30.700 --> 11:34.300] And now he's suddenly turning out larger crowds and drawing more media attention. [11:34.300 --> 11:38.580] He's hoping to make a strong showing in Iowa by courting conservative voters just as [11:38.580 --> 11:46.540] previous caucus winner Mike Huckabey did four years ago. [11:46.540 --> 11:48.100] Senator Santorum, welcome back to meet the press. [11:48.100 --> 11:49.100] Thank you, David. [11:49.100 --> 11:50.100] Good to be with you. [11:50.100 --> 11:53.420] So this is the candidate that I'm sitting with who's got the hot hand in Iowa. [11:53.420 --> 11:59.180] Here's the Des Moines Sunday Register here, Romney Paul Leade, Santorum closes in. [11:59.180 --> 12:03.300] We just talked about in that last segment how you have had this surge, particularly in [12:03.300 --> 12:05.900] the last couple of days. [12:05.900 --> 12:06.900] What does it mean? [12:06.900 --> 12:08.700] What does it say to you about what's going on here in the state? [12:08.700 --> 12:12.300] Well, the people of Iowa, I've been saying this from the very beginning, you know, people [12:12.300 --> 12:13.860] of asking me, and when are you going to get your surge? [12:13.860 --> 12:14.860] You're not going anywhere. [12:14.860 --> 12:17.700] Your message must not be resonated, and I said, you know, my surge is going to come [12:17.700 --> 12:19.420] on January 3rd. [12:19.420 --> 12:23.660] After the people of Iowa do what they do, which is actually analyze the candidates, figure [12:23.660 --> 12:28.100] out where their positions are, find out who's the right leader, who's got the what it [12:28.100 --> 12:32.740] takes to defeat Barack Obama and to lead this country, and I've always relied that when [12:32.740 --> 12:36.460] that crunch time comes in these last two weeks, that's when we're going to start to pick [12:36.460 --> 12:37.460] up. [12:37.460 --> 12:38.460] And that's exactly what's happened. [12:38.460 --> 12:43.300] You've talked about needing a miracle here in Iowa, but expectations have changed now. [12:43.300 --> 12:46.420] Is anything less than a win here? [12:46.420 --> 12:47.420] Not measuring up to expectations? [12:47.420 --> 12:52.540] That's really funny, actually, because 10 days ago I was at 5% and every question I got [12:52.540 --> 12:54.900] was, you know, why don't you pack it up? [12:54.900 --> 12:56.780] Why don't you endorse another candidate? [12:56.780 --> 13:01.060] And now 10 days later you're saying, oh, you got to win another lead, the exceed expectations. [13:01.060 --> 13:04.940] Look, we feel very good about the way things are going on the ground. [13:04.940 --> 13:07.980] We've got a great grassroots organization, we've got a great team of people who are out [13:07.980 --> 13:08.980] helping us in. [13:08.980 --> 13:13.620] And they're committed to making sure that this isn't a puric victory in November, that [13:13.620 --> 13:17.740] we actually elect someone who's exactly what American needs to turn this country around, [13:17.740 --> 13:22.220] not someone who, well, just might be able to win and then not really do the change that's [13:22.220 --> 13:23.220] necessary in Washington. [13:23.220 --> 13:27.620] But one more on just flat expectations, you feel, at this point, particularly, you've [13:27.620 --> 13:31.420] got to do better than a Michelle Bachman or Rick Perry in order to continue in this race. [13:31.420 --> 13:33.220] Yeah, I've always said there's really three primaries. [13:33.220 --> 13:36.660] I mean, you have the conservative primary, and you mentioned the other two people who [13:36.660 --> 13:41.060] I think are in the conservative primary, you have the libertarian primary, and then you [13:41.060 --> 13:45.100] have Gingrich and Romney sort of fighting for the establishment vote. [13:45.100 --> 13:51.300] And our feeling was from the very beginning, if we can pace ahead of Perry and or Bachman [13:51.300 --> 13:54.900] that we'd be in good shape, and we're moving in that direction, certainly right now. [13:54.900 --> 13:58.220] You talk about electability, you talk about conservative credentials. [13:58.220 --> 14:04.020] But we've been checking on this, you know, 20 years ago this week, actually, that you [14:04.020 --> 14:08.380] began your service in Washington, and had you not lost for reelection, you'd still be [14:08.380 --> 14:11.060] in Washington as a senator. [14:11.060 --> 14:15.860] But you spent 16 years as a member of Congress for in the House 12 in the Senate, and yet [14:15.860 --> 14:19.100] there's nobody who's served with you, who's endorsed you, have we? [14:19.100 --> 14:21.380] It's funny, I haven't asked anybody. [14:21.380 --> 14:25.900] And the reason I haven't asked anybody, I'm sitting at 3% in the national pulse, and I [14:25.900 --> 14:29.540] really haven't gone out and asked any United States Center, I've haven't asked a single [14:29.540 --> 14:33.580] one to endorse me, because I felt like I had to earn it first. [14:33.580 --> 14:38.220] But I had to go out and prove to, you know, I lost my last race, and the general consensus [14:38.220 --> 14:44.260] was, you know, we like Rick, but, you know, who goes from losing their last Senate race [14:44.260 --> 14:48.540] to winning the presidential nomination, my answer that was while Abraham Lincoln, but [14:48.540 --> 14:51.980] other than Abraham Lincoln, this is not a common occurrence, and so I don't know what [14:51.980 --> 14:57.220] he was going out on a limb to offer, given having served with you, knowing your credentials, [14:57.220 --> 14:58.220] knowing your principles. [14:58.220 --> 15:02.820] Yeah, again, no one's going to call you and say, you know, gee, can I, you know, can [15:02.820 --> 15:08.380] I help your campaign at 3%, and I would have said to them, you know, what, wait, because [15:08.380 --> 15:12.540] it doesn't matter, I don't really need or want Washington endorsements, that's not what [15:12.540 --> 15:13.540] I'm here to do. [15:13.540 --> 15:17.340] I'm here to change Washington, and so I didn't really seek out endorsements, I didn't really [15:17.340 --> 15:19.580] want their endorsements, I didn't think they would help very much. [15:19.580 --> 15:20.580] Would you seek them out now? [15:20.580 --> 15:24.420] If people want to endorse me, I'd love their endorsements, but that's not what I'm coming [15:24.420 --> 15:25.420] here to do. [15:25.420 --> 15:30.380] I'm not coming to, to be buddies with my friends and in the Senate in the House, I'm coming [15:30.380 --> 15:35.020] to change the entire nature of Washington, D.C. It's one, one, one of the benefits, frankly, [15:35.020 --> 15:40.740] of being out and looking in and seeing what, you know, sometimes you said, you know, I was, [15:40.740 --> 15:43.300] you know, running as a consistent conservative. [15:43.300 --> 15:47.140] There are votes that I took, not that I advocated these things, but I voted for some things, [15:47.140 --> 15:49.380] I look back and say, why the heck did I do that? [15:49.380 --> 15:54.820] You get involved in sort of the idea that, well, you got to make things happen, and you [15:54.820 --> 16:00.300] forget sometimes, you know, sometimes making some things happen is better off making [16:00.300 --> 16:01.300] things happen. [16:01.300 --> 16:03.340] Now, I wonder if one of those examples might be pork barrel spending, because you're getting hit [16:03.340 --> 16:06.940] by Rick Perry about that, by supporting the notorious bridge to nowhere. [16:06.940 --> 16:11.380] Another pork barrel projects where you deliver cash for folks back in your home state. [16:11.380 --> 16:15.100] Do you regret voting for some of those projects? [16:15.100 --> 16:16.860] You've defended pork barrel spending in the past. [16:16.860 --> 16:21.660] What I said is that your role as a member of Congress, if you look at the Constitution, [16:21.660 --> 16:22.660] is to appropriate money. [16:22.660 --> 16:25.460] And of course, your appropriate money, you're going to say where that money is going to go. [16:25.460 --> 16:28.460] You're not going to say, well, here's the money Mr. President spending anywhere you want. [16:28.460 --> 16:33.820] And historically, Congress has taken the role of allocating those resources, and, you know, [16:33.820 --> 16:37.660] Jim Dement, who led the charge on pork barrel spending. [16:37.660 --> 16:39.140] Earmarked things for years and years. [16:39.140 --> 16:43.500] And so what happened after I left Congress was, budgets began to explode. [16:43.500 --> 16:49.660] When I was in the Senate, I voted for tough budgets, I voted for restrictions on spending, [16:49.660 --> 16:51.060] and made sure that that didn't happen. [16:51.060 --> 16:54.700] And as president, I proposed cutting $5 trillion over five years. [16:54.700 --> 16:58.660] I proposed we're going to balance the budget, and at least five years, hopefully sooner. [16:58.660 --> 17:03.340] So if you're looking for someone who's voted for tough budgets, voted for spending restraints. [17:03.340 --> 17:04.340] But that wasn't my question. [17:04.340 --> 17:07.460] Do you regret supporting earmarks when you did? [17:07.460 --> 17:11.820] I don't regret going out at the time, and making sure that the people of Pennsylvania, [17:11.820 --> 17:14.940] who I was elected to represent, got resources back in the Senate. [17:14.940 --> 17:18.020] So if there's a person spending money, but if the budget's tighter is not? [17:18.020 --> 17:19.620] What happened was abuse. [17:19.620 --> 17:22.620] There was abuse of this process, and I agreed with that. [17:22.620 --> 17:24.780] There wasn't abuse, and it was leading to more spending. [17:24.780 --> 17:28.780] It was leading to bigger spending bills, and it had to end, and I supported it and [17:28.780 --> 17:29.780] I recorded it. [17:29.780 --> 17:30.780] And policing of America. [17:30.780 --> 17:31.780] Do you agree that? [17:31.780 --> 17:35.300] Well, that's pretty funny, because Rick Perry was hiring lobbyists to flee America then, [17:35.300 --> 17:39.220] because he was hiring lobbyists to represent the state of Texas to get more money back. [17:39.220 --> 17:43.820] And I suspect, if you ask K Hutchison, if you ask John Cornan, or any of the Texas delegation [17:43.820 --> 17:47.500] where the Rick Perry wanted money coming back to the state of Texas, the Texan Center, [17:47.500 --> 17:48.980] he'd say, yes, he did. [17:48.980 --> 17:53.420] So look, there's a legitimate role for Congress to allocate resources. [17:53.420 --> 17:55.780] That's what the Constitution requires them to do. [17:55.780 --> 17:58.780] When there's abuse, then you curb the abuse, and I supported that. [17:58.780 --> 18:00.860] Let's talk about final arguments here in Iowa. [18:00.860 --> 18:04.660] Your latest ad talks about conservative credentials and electability. [18:04.660 --> 18:06.660] Let me play a portion of it. [18:06.660 --> 18:12.140] Who has the best chance to beat Obama, Rick Santorum, a full spectrum conservative, [18:12.140 --> 18:17.500] Rick Santorum is rock solid on values issues. [18:17.500 --> 18:23.220] So you've been making that contrast consistently questioning Governor Romney, you calling [18:23.220 --> 18:27.860] him a liberal Massachusetts governor, arguing in fact that he is a moderate. [18:27.860 --> 18:30.820] You had back in 2008 when he was running for the presidency, you were singing a different [18:30.820 --> 18:31.820] tune. [18:31.820 --> 18:33.220] This was your press release back then. [18:33.220 --> 18:36.620] You said, Governor Romney is the candidate who will stand up for the conservative [18:36.620 --> 18:38.460] principles that we hold dear. [18:38.460 --> 18:42.220] He has a deep understanding of the important issues confronting our country today. [18:42.220 --> 18:46.380] And he is the clear conservative candidate that can go into the general election with [18:46.380 --> 18:48.300] the United Republican Party. [18:48.300 --> 18:51.980] We'll stand up for the conservative principles that we hold dear you and praised his work [18:51.980 --> 18:54.460] on fighting same-sex marriage. [18:54.460 --> 18:55.460] What changed? [18:55.460 --> 18:57.900] Well, what changed was who he's running against? [18:57.900 --> 19:03.500] At the time, that was five days or four days before super Tuesday was after Florida. [19:03.500 --> 19:06.820] And it became clear to me that there were two candidates in the race at that point. [19:06.820 --> 19:11.900] I thought, Mike Huckabee, I would have loved to have Mike Huckabee out there, but I made [19:11.900 --> 19:16.460] the political judgment right or wrong that the best chance to stop John McCain, which was [19:16.460 --> 19:17.460] what Mike and Sirin was. [19:17.460 --> 19:20.020] I had served 12 years with John McCain. [19:20.020 --> 19:24.260] I like in respect John McCain immensely personally, and he's done a lot of great things [19:24.260 --> 19:27.620] obviously for this country, but I did not think he was the right person. [19:27.620 --> 19:31.540] Based on my experience and deep knowledge of his record, that he was the right person [19:31.540 --> 19:32.540] to be the nominee. [19:32.540 --> 19:36.540] And Sirin, we'll stand up for the conservative principles that we hold dear, but you [19:36.540 --> 19:37.540] didn't say. [19:37.540 --> 19:38.940] Well, of course, I'm not going to say compared to. [19:38.940 --> 19:41.780] I mean, I'm trying to advocate for his candidacy at [19:41.780 --> 19:43.420] the time when you don't mean that. [19:43.420 --> 19:46.540] Well, I was saying it relative to John McCain. [19:46.540 --> 19:47.540] And that's what I meant then. [19:47.540 --> 19:51.140] And remember, it's not like I was an early supporter of Ramley, I endorsed him actually [19:51.140 --> 19:53.020] seven days before he dropped out of the race. [19:53.020 --> 19:54.220] So maybe I was a little bit of a- [19:54.220 --> 19:56.740] Does he have conservative values? [19:56.740 --> 19:57.740] I would like Sirin to principle. [19:57.740 --> 20:02.620] Of course, everybody on that stage that is in these debates has conservative values [20:02.620 --> 20:06.980] vis-a-vis president of Obama, and generally reflects the Republican party. [20:06.980 --> 20:12.300] The question is, are those values ones that you can trust when they become president [20:12.300 --> 20:13.300] of the United States? [20:13.300 --> 20:17.340] Is it someone who you know is going to fight not just for certain things, but for the [20:17.340 --> 20:19.340] entire Republican platform of Plank. [20:19.340 --> 20:20.340] Why? [20:20.340 --> 20:22.340] Because those things integrate together. [20:22.340 --> 20:24.020] And you've heard me talk about this many times. [20:24.020 --> 20:28.340] You can't have a strong economy and just a strong economic plan unless you have strong [20:28.340 --> 20:30.740] families and you have moral values in this country. [20:30.740 --> 20:31.740] Why? [20:31.740 --> 20:32.740] Because that's the underpinning of our system. [20:32.740 --> 20:33.740] But you're talking about a lot. [20:33.740 --> 20:37.700] You're talking about trust as a conservative. [20:37.700 --> 20:42.580] And you have accused Romney of tacking back and forth as he saw a election calling a [20:42.580 --> 20:44.940] liberal governor from Massachusetts. [20:44.940 --> 20:49.900] But we look at your own record as well, running for reelection to the Senate in 2006 [20:49.900 --> 20:52.220] in a Democratic state of Pennsylvania. [20:52.220 --> 20:55.980] Now here in Iowa you've taken the pledge, opposing abortion. [20:55.980 --> 21:01.100] Back on this program this summer, you said you oppose abortion without exception. [21:01.100 --> 21:02.100] Right. [21:02.100 --> 21:05.380] So running for reelection in 2006, you had a different view. [21:05.380 --> 21:07.140] And this is what you told the Associated Press. [21:07.140 --> 21:10.700] The question was, do you support legalized abortion if a woman has been raped or [21:10.700 --> 21:12.340] she is the victim of incest? [21:12.340 --> 21:16.260] What about if a woman's health or life is in danger, please explain your answer? [21:16.260 --> 21:20.420] Back then you said, I would support laws that include exceptions in cases of rape and [21:20.420 --> 21:23.420] incest and when the life of the mother is at risk. [21:23.420 --> 21:27.260] So didn't you when you were running for reelection do the same thing you've accused [21:27.260 --> 21:31.220] Romney of, which is moderating your stance and trying to win a Democratic state? [21:31.220 --> 21:34.940] Today, I would support laws that would provide for those exceptions, but I'm not for [21:34.940 --> 21:35.940] them. [21:35.940 --> 21:37.660] In other words, I support the hide-of-memit. [21:37.660 --> 21:41.180] The hide-of-memit provides exception for rape and incest and the life of the mother. [21:41.180 --> 21:46.820] And so yes, I support laws that provide those exceptions because if we can get those past, [21:46.820 --> 21:48.060] then we need to do that. [21:48.060 --> 21:49.540] But I'm not a violation of your pledge. [21:49.540 --> 21:50.540] No, you're not. [21:50.540 --> 21:53.540] You try to, I support the partial birth abortion ban act. [21:53.540 --> 21:54.940] That does that ban all abortions? [21:54.940 --> 21:55.940] No. [21:55.940 --> 21:57.460] But it moves the country in the right direction. [21:57.460 --> 22:01.020] And so what I've said in the past consistently is I'll support laws that move the ball [22:01.020 --> 22:02.020] forward. [22:02.020 --> 22:05.460] That doesn't mean that's my position and that's where I'd like to go, but that's exactly [22:05.460 --> 22:08.260] the direction we need to go in. [22:08.260 --> 22:13.660] The issue of moderation is goes beyond abortion. [22:13.660 --> 22:17.940] Back in 2006, you were fighting the idea that you were seen as too conservative. [22:17.940 --> 22:23.260] You had television ads, harolding the fact that you oppose reductions in the minimum [22:23.260 --> 22:26.780] ways that you were fighting cuts against Antrach. [22:26.780 --> 22:32.700] Isn't your history to try to moderate both when fighting for reelection, but also as [22:32.700 --> 22:35.860] a member of Congress, to try to find common ground and to compromise? [22:35.860 --> 22:38.940] Of course, my background is to find compromise. [22:38.940 --> 22:40.740] That's what you have to do in order to get things done. [22:40.740 --> 22:42.780] You don't compromise on your principles. [22:42.780 --> 22:44.780] I use welfare reform as an example. [22:44.780 --> 22:50.220] I went out and helped author the welfare reform bill that became the contract with America [22:50.220 --> 22:51.220] bill. [22:51.220 --> 22:54.700] And then when I was in the United States Senate, I managed that bill as a first term, first [22:54.700 --> 22:56.100] year member of the United States Senate. [22:56.100 --> 23:00.860] I went up against Daniel Patrick Mornand, a Ted Kennedy, and battled over two vetoes [23:00.860 --> 23:02.900] of President Clinton was able to get it done. [23:02.900 --> 23:04.380] Did I make compromise as you bet? [23:04.380 --> 23:09.660] But the compromises I made were not fundamental to the transformation that was important [23:09.660 --> 23:12.460] to in welfare, which was to end the federal entitlement. [23:12.460 --> 23:16.140] The only bill that I'm aware of, only law that's actually ever ended a broad-based [23:16.140 --> 23:17.140] federal entitlement. [23:17.140 --> 23:19.220] I was the author and manager of the bill on. [23:19.220 --> 23:24.340] And we put time limits on welfare and we put a work requirement in place. [23:24.340 --> 23:27.220] Those were the things that I believe were transformational. [23:27.220 --> 23:29.060] Was I willing to compromise on daycare funding? [23:29.060 --> 23:30.060] Yes, I was. [23:30.060 --> 23:33.900] Was I willing to compromise on transportation to get folks from welfare to work? [23:33.900 --> 23:34.900] Yes, I was. [23:34.900 --> 23:40.180] But what we did was something that was moving the direction of a more limited government in [23:40.180 --> 23:44.380] order to get the necessary votes to get that done, you have to make compromise. [23:44.380 --> 23:49.780] But we did a direction of limited government, maybe less than what we wanted to. [23:49.780 --> 23:53.380] But we weren't going in the direction of more government and getting less of more. [23:53.380 --> 23:56.900] That's where Republicans have been in error for so many years. [23:56.900 --> 24:01.780] And that is compromising on just a little less big government, instead of saying no. [24:01.780 --> 24:04.060] No more compromises and less big government. [24:04.060 --> 24:09.820] We'll compromise on less less government, but not going the other way. [24:09.820 --> 24:16.900] One of the things you look at as an insurgent party, trying to beat an incumbent president. [24:16.900 --> 24:21.500] You said that a second term for president Obama would be dangerous for the country. [24:21.500 --> 24:24.100] And that you look at the party that's making the challenge. [24:24.100 --> 24:28.860] And here's the reality, disapproval for the Republican party right now in Congress. [24:28.860 --> 24:34.140] I should say approval of Republicans at Congress stands at 26%. [24:34.140 --> 24:36.620] That's far less than the president's approval rating. [24:36.620 --> 24:41.180] And Dan Balls writes this in the Washington Post in his column on Tuesday for GOP candidates [24:41.180 --> 24:42.820] worries about the party's brand. [24:42.820 --> 24:46.780] A year ago, after their big victory in the midterm elections, Republicans were full of confidence [24:46.780 --> 24:49.700] in anticipation as Americans looked toward next November. [24:49.700 --> 24:53.780] The question that many will be asking is, are the Republicans really ready to lead? [24:53.780 --> 24:57.940] In three political arenas, Congress, the states, and the presidential campaign trail, Republicans [24:57.940 --> 25:00.900] have left a checkered record in the past year. [25:00.900 --> 25:08.020] In Congress, it was the debt debacle forcing a near shutdown of the government, the payroll [25:08.020 --> 25:12.500] tax debate that looked to go in the president's favor, the fight with the unions and [25:12.500 --> 25:14.620] the states like Wisconsin. [25:14.620 --> 25:19.340] Do you fault Republican leaders in Congress for not doing more to make government work better [25:19.340 --> 25:20.860] through more compromise with the president? [25:20.860 --> 25:25.660] You have to have someone you can work with and this president has done more to divide than [25:25.660 --> 25:28.100] any other president that I've ever witnessed in my lifetime. [25:28.100 --> 25:31.780] This president goes out and gets speech after speech after speech, trying to divide America [25:31.780 --> 25:36.740] between class, between income group, between racial and ethnic groups. [25:36.740 --> 25:39.220] This is the great divider in chief. [25:39.220 --> 25:43.100] And it's very difficult when you're being limpooned by the president on a regular basis, [25:43.100 --> 25:48.060] not just as a party but individually, to then, and the president who I don't believe [25:48.060 --> 25:53.300] is met with bainer or any of the Republican leadership in now six months, hard to compromise [25:53.300 --> 25:57.620] and work with someone who won't meet with you, who won't sit down and try to negotiate [25:57.620 --> 25:58.620] things and try to talk. [25:58.620 --> 26:03.860] And so I'm not surprised at all that Republicans are having a difficult time with someone [26:03.860 --> 26:04.860] who has no interest with him. [26:04.860 --> 26:08.620] I mean, even the debt fight over the summer was a constant set of meetings. [26:08.620 --> 26:09.620] So that can't be accurate. [26:09.620 --> 26:14.140] Well, if you look at it, the last time he said meetings, I know it's been several months. [26:14.140 --> 26:18.340] And I know that President Bush, when I was there, and President Reagan, routinely [26:18.340 --> 26:23.860] met on a regular basis with the other side and developed relationships, you know, it's [26:23.860 --> 26:24.860] it's about trust. [26:24.860 --> 26:29.060] And you don't build trust by going up and running around the country, beating up on your [26:29.060 --> 26:30.060] opponent. [26:30.060 --> 26:32.020] He's the president of everybody in this country. [26:32.020 --> 26:35.700] As president of states, I would be someone who would meet regularly, who would talk and [26:35.700 --> 26:37.740] try to build relationships of trust. [26:37.740 --> 26:44.100] So you don't, in this person, has not done more Republicans for intransigence on taxes, [26:44.100 --> 26:47.940] or spending, or other areas of potential compromise with the president. [26:47.940 --> 26:55.140] Again, we go back to the basic fact, the federal government now is spending about 25% of GDP. [26:55.140 --> 26:58.500] That's historically the average is about 18%. [26:58.500 --> 27:01.300] We have an explosion of spending. [27:01.300 --> 27:06.100] And the problem in this country is government oppression, spending, and that's leading [27:06.100 --> 27:08.260] to huge deaths and deficits. [27:08.260 --> 27:11.260] What the Republicans have said is, no more. [27:11.260 --> 27:15.700] We are going to move in the direction of smaller government, and President Obama has no interest [27:15.700 --> 27:16.700] in doing that. [27:16.700 --> 27:20.060] I think Republicans are right to stand and fight on this. [27:20.060 --> 27:23.860] And the president seems to be absolutely disinterested in listening to what the American [27:23.860 --> 27:27.580] public said in the last election, which is we want more limited government. [27:27.580 --> 27:28.860] He did not get the message. [27:28.860 --> 27:31.580] I guess he's going to have to get this message, hopefully, in November. [27:31.580 --> 27:33.820] Before you go, I want to ask you about foreign policy. [27:33.820 --> 27:37.500] You've been very critical of the president, particularly on the issue of Iran, which has [27:37.500 --> 27:42.940] been a big issue of debate here in Iowa, let me play a portion of that. [27:42.940 --> 27:50.260] And this president, for every thug and whole again, for every radical Islamist, he has had [27:50.260 --> 27:52.940] nothing but appeasement. [27:52.940 --> 28:00.260] We saw that during the lead-up to war war II, appeasement. [28:00.260 --> 28:04.820] How can that possibly be accurate if you've taken an objective look at the foreign policy [28:04.820 --> 28:06.220] of this administration? [28:06.220 --> 28:10.740] What on Iran specifically separates the approach the President Obama has taken and that [28:10.740 --> 28:11.740] of President Bush? [28:11.740 --> 28:15.860] Number one, he didn't support the pro-democracy movement in Iran in 2009 during the Green [28:15.860 --> 28:17.260] Revolution. [28:17.260 --> 28:21.460] Almost immediately after the election, I mean, excuse me, like with hours after the [28:21.460 --> 28:26.460] polls closed, I'm a Denizata announced that he won with 62% of the vote within a few days [28:26.460 --> 28:29.860] President Obama basically said that that was election was a legitimate one. [28:29.860 --> 28:30.860] What would that have done so well? [28:30.860 --> 28:35.140] Well, I understand why the president would understand that someone announcing a minute after [28:35.140 --> 28:38.180] the polls closed that he won, I mean, comes from Chicago, so I get it. [28:38.180 --> 28:42.580] But the problem is that this was an illegitimate election, the people in the streets were [28:42.580 --> 28:45.700] rioting, saying, please support us, President Obama. [28:45.700 --> 28:47.100] We are the pro-democracy movement. [28:47.100 --> 28:51.020] We want to turn this theocracy that has been at war with the United States that's developing [28:51.020 --> 28:55.980] a nuclear weapon that's killing our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq with IEDs and the [28:55.980 --> 28:58.820] President-Eye States turned his back on them. [28:58.820 --> 29:03.340] At the same time, a few years later, we have the same situation where Muslim brotherhood [29:03.340 --> 29:08.460] and Islamist are in the streets of Egypt opposing an ally of ours, not a sworn enemy [29:08.460 --> 29:13.460] like Iran, but an ally of ours in Mubarak, and he joins the radicals instead of standing [29:13.460 --> 29:14.460] with our friends. [29:14.460 --> 29:17.420] The first of all, that's patently contradictory. [29:17.420 --> 29:21.820] If you say you support democracy, there was a democratic movement in Egypt, and the Muslim [29:21.820 --> 29:22.820] brotherhood got elected. [29:22.820 --> 29:25.420] So how could you be for democracy in some countries and not others? [29:25.420 --> 29:26.420] Because, which is inconsistent. [29:26.420 --> 29:29.540] No, the Muslim brotherhood is not about democracy. [29:29.540 --> 29:32.540] The Muslim brotherhood are Islamists, the Muslim brotherhood are going to impose [29:32.540 --> 29:33.540] it everywhere. [29:33.540 --> 29:34.540] It's not what democracy is. [29:34.540 --> 29:35.540] No. [29:35.540 --> 29:40.180] And I ask you about disarming Iran, there is no material difference in terms of how the [29:40.180 --> 29:45.020] Bush administration sought to disarmer on and what the Obama administration has done. [29:45.020 --> 29:47.300] There's a material difference in this respect. [29:47.300 --> 29:51.660] Number one, the Bush administration worked with me in passing the Iran Freedom Support Act, [29:51.660 --> 29:56.260] which I authored, which imposed tough sanctions on the Iranian nuclear program and provided [29:56.260 --> 29:58.980] funding for the pro-democracy movement. [29:58.980 --> 30:02.420] When President Obama came into office, he cut that funding. [30:02.420 --> 30:08.220] The Obama did not provide funding into Iran to help those folks who wanted to overthrow [30:08.220 --> 30:09.220] this democracy. [30:09.220 --> 30:12.580] And when the time came to support them, he chose not to. [30:12.580 --> 30:16.860] That is a substantive difference between my policy, which I was a leader on in the Senate [30:16.860 --> 30:19.700] and what President Bush tried to do when he was present. [30:19.700 --> 30:22.500] There is no good option to disarmer Iran. [30:22.500 --> 30:25.620] The Bush administration knew that this administration knows that. [30:25.620 --> 30:29.520] Tell me what you would do differently, I put forth a five-point plan that said, fund the [30:29.520 --> 30:32.720] pro-democracy movement, use covert activity to disarmer. [30:32.720 --> 30:34.120] Which is already being done, Senator. [30:34.120 --> 30:38.440] No, there's covert activity to set back their program by the Israelis, by the United [30:38.440 --> 30:39.440] States. [30:39.440 --> 30:41.120] Well, we know by the Israelis. [30:41.120 --> 30:43.640] We don't have any evidence if you look at what's being done. [30:43.640 --> 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 --> 30:52.120] There's no evidence the United States has had all complicit in working at that. [30:52.120 --> 30:57.680] That's what I would be very direct that we would, in fact, and openly talk about this. [30:57.680 --> 30:58.680] Why? [30:58.680 --> 31:02.040] Because I want to make sure that Iran knows that when I say that Iran is not getting a nuclear [31:02.040 --> 31:05.720] weapon, that we will actually effectuate policies that make that happen. [31:05.720 --> 31:07.280] This President has not done that. [31:07.280 --> 31:10.840] He is opposed to sanctions on Iran on their oil program. [31:10.840 --> 31:11.840] Why? [31:11.840 --> 31:15.680] Because he's concerned about the economy and his reelection instead of the long-term national [31:15.680 --> 31:17.280] security interests of this country. [31:17.280 --> 31:21.180] I would say to every foreign scientist that's going into Iran to help them with their [31:21.180 --> 31:25.440] program, you will be treated as an enemy combatant like an al Qaeda member. [31:25.440 --> 31:29.060] And finally, I would be working openly with the state of Israel, and I would be saying [31:29.060 --> 31:32.920] to the Iran age, you to open up those facilities, you begin to dismantle them and make [31:32.920 --> 31:37.040] them available to inspectors, or we will degrade those facilities through air strikes, [31:37.040 --> 31:39.040] and make it very public that we are doing that. [31:39.040 --> 31:42.680] The President has done so you would lay on a red line, and if they passed it, air strikes [31:42.680 --> 31:43.680] by President Centaur. [31:43.680 --> 31:47.120] Iran will not get a nuclear weapon under my watch. [31:47.120 --> 31:49.120] Well, two previous presidents have said that. [31:49.120 --> 31:51.920] You would order air strikes if it would be clear that they were going to... [31:51.920 --> 31:53.920] That's the plan. [31:53.920 --> 31:58.320] You can't go out and say, this is the problem with this administration. [31:58.320 --> 32:01.600] You can't go out and say this is what I'm for, and then do nothing. [32:01.600 --> 32:05.800] You become a paper tiger, and people don't respect our country, and our allies can't trust [32:05.800 --> 32:06.800] us. [32:06.800 --> 32:07.800] That's the problem with this administration. [32:07.800 --> 32:08.800] All right. [32:08.800 --> 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 Iraq. [32:13.320 --> 32:17.320] I've always said that the people of Iraq are the ones who I put my trust in, and not just [32:17.320 --> 32:18.320] Iowa, New Hampshire. [32:18.320 --> 32:19.800] We've got a great team up in New Hampshire. [32:19.800 --> 32:23.840] We've got about two dozen state legislators who have signed on to our campaign. [32:23.840 --> 32:27.560] The county attorney's sheriffs, we've got a great team up there, and we're going to have [32:27.560 --> 32:31.560] a big jump here, and I don't know what it's going to be, but we're unlike Rick Perry, [32:31.560 --> 32:34.760] unlike Michelle Bach, when unlike others, we're going to New Hampshire, because we're [32:34.760 --> 32:37.160] going to compete in every region of this country. [32:37.160 --> 32:38.560] I come from the Northeast. [32:38.560 --> 32:41.960] I've been able to get the blue collar voters, the Reagan Democrats, to vote for me in the [32:41.960 --> 32:43.720] past, and we're going to do the same thing. [32:43.720 --> 32:44.960] And that's why we're going to win this election. [32:44.960 --> 32:45.960] Senator Centaur, I'm thank you. [32:45.960 --> 32:47.760] We'll see you in New Hampshire for our debate next week. [32:47.760 --> 32:48.760] Thanks, David. [32:48.760 --> 32:49.760] Okay. [32:49.760 --> 32:54.240] On this New Year's Day, the final countdown to Iowa, Ron Paul, with a strong showing [32:54.240 --> 32:58.400] in the polls, drawing fire now from his Republican rivals, while Mitt Romney said his [32:58.400 --> 33:03.120] sides on President Obama, who just four years ago pulled off a surprise, come from behind [33:03.120 --> 33:07.320] win here, plus the president and his team gearing up for the fight as well. [33:07.320 --> 33:11.240] He's going to the important battleground state of Ohio the day after the caucuses. [33:11.240 --> 33:13.120] It's a new year in a new campaign. [33:13.120 --> 33:16.120] We'll break it all down with our political round table, joining us. [33:16.120 --> 33:20.680] And to join Registers, Kathy O'Broadowich, Republican strategist Mike Murphy, David [33:20.680 --> 33:25.480] Brooks of the New York Times, Mark Helper, and of Time Magazine, and NBC's, and Rio [33:25.480 --> 33:26.480] Mitchell. [33:26.480 --> 33:34.040] Meet the press as brought to you by the Boeing company. [33:34.040 --> 33:35.480] Have you met your skin twin? [33:35.480 --> 33:38.200] Cover girl true blend has skin twin technology. [33:38.200 --> 33:42.680] Other makeup can sit on your skin, so it looks like makeup, but true blend has skin twin [33:42.680 --> 33:45.280] technology to actually merge with your skin. [33:45.280 --> 33:50.040] How easy breezy beautiful is that, true blend from cover girl. [33:50.040 --> 33:57.280] The Super Bowl, the most epic day in America, and the end of a journey that began here. [33:57.280 --> 34:03.560] When the swipe of a visa card gave one man the chance to bring happiness to 10 friends, [34:03.560 --> 34:05.680] and the new visa on life to one. [34:05.680 --> 34:08.040] That was a false start. [34:08.040 --> 34:09.040] What? [34:09.040 --> 34:10.040] Yeah, Mima. [34:10.040 --> 34:11.040] Yes? [34:11.040 --> 34:12.040] I want to take it to the Super Bowl. [34:12.040 --> 34:13.040] Pack your bags. [34:13.040 --> 34:19.160] Your bags are hard for a chance to win, to achieve your 10th, go to our Facebook page. [34:19.160 --> 34:20.160] Whoa! [34:20.160 --> 34:22.600] This is not the number we talked about. [34:22.600 --> 34:24.200] That's our phone number. [34:24.200 --> 34:27.360] No surprise pricing is one thing that makes Pearl Vision different, and you're something [34:27.360 --> 34:28.360] else. [34:28.360 --> 34:31.240] Buy a pair of eyeglasses or prescription sunglasses, and we'll give you another pair. [34:31.240 --> 34:35.040] Free visit PearlVision.com for a story near you. [34:35.040 --> 34:37.800] Holidays were met for family. [34:37.800 --> 34:42.360] Deep Grand Cherokee is the most awarded SUV ever. [34:42.360 --> 34:48.160] Jeep Compass gets up to 29 MPG highway, and the Jeep Wrangler has an all new power train [34:48.160 --> 34:51.160] with improved performance and fuel economy. [34:51.160 --> 34:54.200] Seasons greetings from our family to yours. [34:54.200 --> 34:57.960] Hurry in, the year's best deals and January 3rd. [34:57.960 --> 35:01.880] During the big finish event, well qualified last season at the 2012 Grand Cherokee [35:01.880 --> 35:04.760] Lerado 4x2 for 309 a month. [35:04.760 --> 35:07.120] Celebrate the new year with a great night's sleep. [35:07.120 --> 35:11.240] Against any sleeper, it can make it happen for less during our 50% off mattress sale. [35:11.240 --> 35:15.520] It's the perfect time to get that luxurious mattress you've been waiting for at a drastically [35:15.520 --> 35:16.840] reduced price. [35:16.840 --> 35:20.840] Imagine curling up into luxurious Simmons beauty rest, relaxing in the comfort of memory [35:20.840 --> 35:24.920] foam on a cert-of-perfect sleeper, or how about a plush ceiling-poster pedic, your choice [35:24.920 --> 35:31.720] of comfort 50% off, and with no interest until 2014, the savings really at a visit sleeper.com [35:31.720 --> 35:39.200] A-muffin new bed I will caucuses will have full analysis from our political roundtable [35:39.200 --> 35:43.800] joining me, Kathy of Roddobit from the Devoin Register, Mike Murphy, David Brooks, Mark [35:43.800 --> 35:50.360] Alperon, and NBC's Andrew Mitchell, up next after this brief commercial break. [35:50.360 --> 35:51.360] I have a cold. [35:51.360 --> 35:53.800] I took Nyquil, but I'm still stut up. [35:53.800 --> 35:56.200] Truth is, Nyquil doesn't un-stop your nose. [35:56.200 --> 35:57.200] Really? [35:57.200 --> 36:02.880] This liquid gels fight your worst cold symptoms, plus it relieves your stuffy nose. [36:02.880 --> 36:05.120] That's the cold truth. [36:05.120 --> 36:07.320] What makes this sleep number store different? [36:07.320 --> 36:09.720] You're walking to a conventional mattress store. [36:09.720 --> 36:10.960] It's really not about you. [36:10.960 --> 36:13.560] They say, well, if you want to affirm bed, you can lie on one of those. [36:13.560 --> 36:15.600] If you want to solve bed, you can lie on one of those. [36:15.600 --> 36:19.440] We provide the exact individualization that your body needs. [36:19.440 --> 36:21.240] It's really shaping to my body. [36:21.240 --> 36:23.880] Once they get our beds, they're on widened idea of the center. [36:23.880 --> 36:30.440] At the sleep number year and close-out event, save up to $800 on selected 2011 bed sets. [36:30.440 --> 36:34.760] Only at the sleep number store, where Queen Bed sets now start at just $8.99. [36:34.760 --> 36:39.920] Ola, even number one skin care brand in North America, offers its most effective anti-aging [36:39.920 --> 36:44.800] regiment to fight the look of wrinkles, Ola Professional Pro X, developed by Ola with leading [36:44.800 --> 36:50.000] dermatologists for professional level results guaranteed. [36:50.000 --> 36:55.960] They have been awarded a power plant where the expenses fell like snow. [36:55.960 --> 36:59.240] The my dad got to miss Othelioma from his bestest. [36:59.240 --> 37:02.120] Oh, the diagnosis was devastating. [37:02.120 --> 37:06.200] We chose Queen and Conway because they're highly experienced in this area. [37:06.200 --> 37:07.600] They were more than lawyers. [37:07.600 --> 37:09.440] They were human beings. [37:09.440 --> 37:11.200] There was no money upfront. [37:11.200 --> 37:14.680] It showed my son's that there was justice in the world. [37:14.680 --> 37:20.360] Call 183-2255-73, Coney and Conway, justice with a passion. [37:20.360 --> 37:24.040] Can't button him here to tell you about the incredible offer at Pottenham Jeep in Berlin [37:24.040 --> 37:25.040] game. [37:25.040 --> 37:31.560] Right now, Pottenham 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 --> 37:33.920] No games, no gimmicks. [37:33.920 --> 37:39.800] Pick your Jeep Grand Cherokee, take a look at the sticker, then take off $5,000. [37:39.800 --> 37:46.400] Many of new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee's in stock and Pottenham's taking $5,000 off the sticker [37:46.400 --> 37:47.400] price. [37:47.400 --> 37:56.120] Only, I'd put them Jeep in, Berlin game. [37:56.120 --> 37:59.760] We are back with our political round table joining me with Republican strategist Mike Murphy [37:59.760 --> 38:01.760] New York Times columnist David. [38:01.760 --> 38:06.040] Hi, magazine senior political analyst Mark Halpern, columnist for the Des Moines Register, [38:06.040 --> 38:11.480] Kathy of Rodovich and host of Andrea Mitchell reports on MSNBC NBC's Andrea Mitchell. [38:11.480 --> 38:12.480] Welcome, everybody. [38:12.480 --> 38:13.480] Thanks for being here. [38:13.480 --> 38:14.480] Happy New Year. [38:14.480 --> 38:15.480] Happy New Year. [38:15.480 --> 38:16.720] We have a great political story to dig into. [38:16.720 --> 38:22.800] Major moments of the week in Kathy of Rodovich with the Des Moines Register Iowa as a toss-up. [38:22.800 --> 38:23.800] Who's going to win this thing? [38:23.800 --> 38:29.400] Boy, you know, it is a moving target right now and right now, all the movement is behind [38:29.400 --> 38:36.920] Rixie and Torm, our poll actually the first two days that we were in the field this week had [38:36.920 --> 38:39.560] Romney and Paul neck and neck. [38:39.560 --> 38:45.800] We actually had an illustration on the front page for our paper of Romney and Paul arm wrestling. [38:45.800 --> 38:50.080] And when we came inside the last two days of pulling, we had to, you know, put in Rixie and Torm [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 --> 38:58.360] Everybody else is static except Ron Paul who is trending down. [38:58.360 --> 39:00.640] I think he peaked a week ago. [39:00.640 --> 39:06.280] Mike Murphy, you're a veteran of these parts and also of the tactics of expectations. [39:06.280 --> 39:11.400] Sure, I spoke to some Romney folks last night who actually suggested they think San [39:11.400 --> 39:13.120] Torm is going to win this thing. [39:13.120 --> 39:16.640] Are they setting us up to say, oh, what a win by Mitt Romney? [39:16.640 --> 39:19.720] Well, I think they think San Torm might win this thing. [39:19.720 --> 39:22.480] They had two easy of a life seven days ago. [39:22.480 --> 39:26.120] They had gingrich declining and they had Ron Paul who would be very easy to beat in the [39:26.120 --> 39:27.640] full series of practices. [39:27.640 --> 39:31.120] So now they've got Rixie and Torm coming up fast, where I think the surge totally legitimate, [39:31.120 --> 39:32.880] your pole shows that. [39:32.880 --> 39:36.160] And consolidating that social conservative vote, which in the past has always been the [39:36.160 --> 39:39.080] key to finishing at least second in the Iowa caucus. [39:39.080 --> 39:43.560] So I think they would love to beat San Torm, but if San Torm beats San Torm, they're still [39:43.560 --> 39:47.440] on the top two and there's great clarity, which is, there's no way Romney comes out [39:47.440 --> 39:49.160] of here at loser fees on the top two. [39:49.160 --> 39:52.320] But now he knows who is the opponent's going to be in a new hamster, which is not social [39:52.320 --> 39:56.240] conservative territory at all, and as they roll the process out. [39:56.240 --> 39:58.040] So I think the Romney people would like a win. [39:58.040 --> 39:59.040] I'm not sure they need one. [39:59.040 --> 40:00.040] I'm not sure they need one. [40:00.040 --> 40:03.400] Part of that analysis is, hey, San Torm is good for us. [40:03.400 --> 40:04.400] We keep it expanded. [40:04.400 --> 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 --> 40:10.480] If Perry can stay in the race, better for Romney. [40:10.480 --> 40:16.480] If the issue is, who is the stalwart conservative, did Rick San Torm help himself this morning [40:16.480 --> 40:17.480] in the final push? [40:17.480 --> 40:18.480] Thank you. [40:18.480 --> 40:20.280] It's convoluted answers to two of your questions. [40:20.280 --> 40:25.240] One about his support for Romney four years ago, and also on rape and incest exceptions [40:25.240 --> 40:27.480] on abortion when he was running in Pennsylvania. [40:27.480 --> 40:29.200] Right now, I see two buckets of scenarios. [40:29.200 --> 40:32.680] They're scenarios that are great for Mitt Romney, and the scenarios that are really good [40:32.680 --> 40:34.400] or decent for Mitt Romney. [40:34.400 --> 40:39.040] They would love to leave here with the top three in whatever order being Paul San Torm and [40:39.040 --> 40:43.040] Romney because they believe they will never lose in the long run, and maybe even the medium [40:43.040 --> 40:45.320] run to San Torm or Paul. [40:45.320 --> 40:49.520] Gingrich and Perry represent bigger threats for them, and I think the worst case for Romney [40:49.520 --> 40:53.680] is if one of those two guys surges in the last few days, no indication that will happen, [40:53.680 --> 40:55.160] but they're both out there working hard. [40:55.160 --> 40:56.560] Andrea Mitchell, you've been out here reporting. [40:56.560 --> 40:57.560] What are you saying? [40:57.560 --> 41:01.600] Well, the crowds are much smaller than you'd expect, smaller than the Huckabee crowds were [41:01.600 --> 41:04.920] four years ago, but that there's that evangelical core. [41:04.920 --> 41:09.800] And when we talk about organization and enthusiasm, they're going to come out, and I think [41:09.800 --> 41:15.520] that as Mark and the rest of us all noticed with you today, San Torm may have stubbed his [41:15.520 --> 41:20.000] toe a bit by you pinning him down on what he said when he was running for reelection [41:20.000 --> 41:24.840] in Pennsylvania in 2006, the exceptions that he previously agreed to. [41:24.840 --> 41:28.560] The fact that he is willing to compromise, he said not on his principles, but to get things [41:28.560 --> 41:34.640] done, a little bit convoluted, and the fact that he said he made a political decision to support [41:34.640 --> 41:37.240] Mitt Romney against John McCain, a political decision. [41:37.240 --> 41:42.080] If the crime David Brooks is moderation in today's Republican Party, what are we learning now, [41:42.080 --> 41:47.040] a couple of days away from actual voting beginning in a Republican caucus about the state [41:47.040 --> 41:48.040] of the party? [41:48.040 --> 41:51.440] So it's a pretty conservative party, but it's not, they don't want dogmatists, and I actually [41:51.440 --> 41:53.120] think San Torm helped himself today. [41:53.120 --> 41:55.360] His problem is not that he compromises too much. [41:55.360 --> 41:58.320] His problem is that people think he's too rigid, and he can show that he's a practical [41:58.320 --> 41:59.320] politician. [41:59.320 --> 42:00.760] I think that's a net plus for him. [42:00.760 --> 42:04.000] You know, Iowa has produced some candidates who have not gone on to great success, how [42:04.000 --> 42:05.880] could be Pat Robertson many years ago. [42:05.880 --> 42:08.440] I don't think Rick San Torm is one of them. [42:08.440 --> 42:12.280] In part, because he's got some working class credentials, as opposed to Romney, in part [42:12.280 --> 42:16.680] because he tells a very good story about connecting moral concerns with the economy, and [42:16.680 --> 42:20.560] partly he's just a good politician, and I covered him in the Senate when he lost badly [42:20.560 --> 42:21.560] in Pennsylvania. [42:21.560 --> 42:23.400] He was a pretty bad politician. [42:23.400 --> 42:26.640] If you look at him today, like you're a baseball scout looking at a pitcher, you'd [42:26.640 --> 42:29.320] say, yeah, this guy's good enough to play in the major leagues. [42:29.320 --> 42:30.960] So I think he's going to be reasonably strong. [42:30.960 --> 42:33.880] I'm not sure he's going to win the nomination, but reasonably strong going out of it. [42:33.880 --> 42:37.080] You talked about the economic message that you think is, yeah, one thing that's not being [42:37.080 --> 42:40.480] covered as much, because his base is social conservatives, is he still the guy of the [42:40.480 --> 42:44.960] blue state, Pennsylvania chops, and he does a very good message on manufacturing jobs, which [42:44.960 --> 42:48.280] is about ringer and eastern Iowa, which people don't, you know, from outside Iowa, don't [42:48.280 --> 42:51.560] know, it's a place where a lot of light manufacturing, and I make one other point about [42:51.560 --> 42:52.560] this morning. [42:52.560 --> 42:53.560] I thought he did fairly well too. [42:53.560 --> 42:56.920] He's always going to be pro-life enough, you know, for the pro-life voters, so that's [42:56.920 --> 42:58.320] not going to be his problem. [42:58.320 --> 43:02.080] But there's something else happening on Sunday morning, which is an evangelical church [43:02.080 --> 43:03.560] is across Iowa and the pulpit. [43:03.560 --> 43:07.880] They're seeing that pulpit, and they're seeing one of our guys is moving fast, and I think [43:07.880 --> 43:10.880] messages are going to go out, and I'm going to be very bad for Perry, going to be very [43:10.880 --> 43:14.280] bad for what's left of Bachman, to go with Rick to win this Friday. [43:14.280 --> 43:18.240] It's a guy that social conservatives will move toward him, and I'll say, that's it. [43:18.240 --> 43:19.880] That's the alternative we've been looking for. [43:19.880 --> 43:23.280] Social conservatives have been like all the other voters in Iowa, they have wanted to give [43:23.280 --> 43:28.880] everybody a try, and they are undecided and unwilling to unwelling to unify, and even in [43:28.880 --> 43:31.720] our poll, they are not unified. [43:31.720 --> 43:36.240] Rick Santorum pulled about 23 percent of people who describe themselves as born again, [43:36.240 --> 43:41.720] but Ron Paul, Ron Paul, and Mitt Romney, each got 18 percent, so they're not united. [43:41.720 --> 43:47.720] They may indeed start moving that way, in the interest of having one of them, as Mike said, [43:47.720 --> 43:48.720] at the top. [43:48.720 --> 43:50.480] Are we not this for everybody? [43:50.480 --> 43:56.160] The volatility we've seen in the polling here, and who comes out of these debates. [43:56.160 --> 43:57.720] What is that tell us? [43:57.720 --> 44:03.280] Is it ultimately going to be portrayed as whether Romney can get above that 25 percent threshold? [44:03.280 --> 44:04.280] Is that not the big issue? [44:04.280 --> 44:06.440] I see, I think it's a little deeper. [44:06.440 --> 44:09.200] One of the things that struck me from all the rallies I've seen out here is a sense [44:09.200 --> 44:14.000] that the country has gone seriously off course, and it's a values thing. [44:14.000 --> 44:17.640] All the campaigns are trying to tap into this saying, we've lost it, let's restore, let's [44:17.640 --> 44:19.640] go back to what we've lost. [44:19.640 --> 44:22.880] You see that in the crowds when you talk to the people, but when you ask them, what do you [44:22.880 --> 44:23.880] want to do? [44:23.880 --> 44:24.880] No one has a clue. [44:24.880 --> 44:25.880] Because they're bound to it. [44:25.880 --> 44:26.880] They're bound to it. [44:26.880 --> 44:32.880] When you feel that anger, it's that wrong track number that we see is the anger against [44:32.880 --> 44:33.880] Washington. [44:33.880 --> 44:36.080] Ron Paul early on tapped into that. [44:36.080 --> 44:41.720] I think he really hurt himself on foreign policy, and on making himself not electable. [44:41.720 --> 44:46.800] The sense in the polls that we saw starting with the polls on Wednesday, then our poll [44:46.800 --> 44:53.000] on Friday, and he was today, he's just not acceptable to so many people because of his [44:53.000 --> 44:58.360] foreign policy positions, and going into South Carolina, in particular, that's going to be a [44:58.360 --> 44:59.360] very big problem. [44:59.360 --> 45:02.080] My gut as an old poll has always been the Ron Paul things overrated, and I'll go on [45:02.080 --> 45:06.400] the dangerous prediction, lemon, thank you, he'll be the surprise to supporting finish. [45:06.400 --> 45:10.320] A lot of his function is, well, new people show up at the caucus, and we always get [45:10.320 --> 45:12.200] to do this by this argument, because it's so much fun. [45:12.200 --> 45:15.640] One of the marches are going to land, we're going to have a march on historically new people [45:15.640 --> 45:16.640] done. [45:16.640 --> 45:19.360] It's Republican primary voters and activists, a question is within the range. [45:19.360 --> 45:22.600] I think because of the wrong track energy and frustration, it turned out actually [45:22.600 --> 45:23.600] will be a little higher than last time. [45:23.600 --> 45:24.600] Not a lot, just a little bit. [45:24.600 --> 45:30.320] So the 27% of this poll, our new caucus goes on, did bring new people into the caucus. [45:30.320 --> 45:32.040] You know, I think that we've got a different electorate than we do. [45:32.040 --> 45:37.040] We did in 2008, because the Democrats don't have a contest, so you have people who were [45:37.040 --> 45:42.600] independents in particular, who want to caucus, and a lot of them are going toward Ron [45:42.600 --> 45:43.600] Paul. [45:43.600 --> 45:49.240] He is the least ideological on the social issues, and also what we're getting is I think [45:49.240 --> 45:52.200] a desperation for real change. [45:52.200 --> 45:55.800] And I think a lot of those folks are flocking toward Ron Paul, because he is the guy who [45:55.800 --> 45:56.800] is completely different. [45:56.800 --> 46:00.000] Maybe, I think he was a sentiment, which is what all these polls measure earlier, there [46:00.000 --> 46:03.280] are noisemeter, but now it's time for voting, I don't know if he's a vote. [46:03.280 --> 46:04.280] And I think he could. [46:04.280 --> 46:05.280] Can I interject something else into this? [46:05.280 --> 46:10.400] So here's the Sunday New York Times, and the lead story is Obama strategy for 12 [46:10.400 --> 46:12.080] election attack Congress. [46:12.080 --> 46:16.320] Now, White House officials, I've talked to you say that that was sensationalized, that [46:16.320 --> 46:20.640] that was overwritten, that yes, the president's going to talk about contrast with Congress, [46:20.640 --> 46:24.040] but he certainly hopes and will work for cooperation. [46:24.040 --> 46:28.360] But we're beginning to see the outlines already in this contest of what the general election [46:28.360 --> 46:32.800] will look like, the general election campaign, no matter who the nominee is. [46:32.800 --> 46:39.520] Now, here was then Senator Obama, when he won in Iowa back in 2008, this is what he said [46:39.520 --> 46:40.520] in part. [46:40.520 --> 46:48.120] The time has come for a president who will be honest about the choices and the challenges [46:48.120 --> 46:49.120] we face. [46:49.120 --> 46:56.120] But listen to you and learn from you even when we disagree, who won't just tell you what [46:56.120 --> 47:01.520] you want to hear, but what you need to know, what you need to know. [47:01.520 --> 47:05.840] And Mitt Romney on the campaign trail this week is actually shadowing, where President [47:05.840 --> 47:10.200] Obama then Senator Obama campaigned in Iowa, and he's got a very different message. [47:10.200 --> 47:12.200] This is it in part. [47:12.200 --> 47:17.640] Four years ago this week, the Barack Obama visited Davenport, and he gave a speech right [47:17.640 --> 47:23.280] down the street, and like most of his campaign speeches, it was long on promises. [47:23.280 --> 47:27.720] He promised that he was going to bring people together, and then he closed his speech [47:27.720 --> 47:28.720] with these words. [47:28.720 --> 47:31.040] He says, this is our moment. [47:31.040 --> 47:33.800] This is our time. [47:33.800 --> 47:37.600] Well, Mr. President, you've had your moment. [47:37.600 --> 47:43.240] We've seen the results, and now Mr. President, this is our time. [47:43.240 --> 47:55.320] So here's the contract for my top run. [47:55.320 --> 48:08.040] I mean, the argument is that the transformational leader that President Obama was supposed [48:08.040 --> 48:11.640] to be, the truth tellers, and tell Americans what they needed to know, not what they wanted [48:11.640 --> 48:12.640] to know, that that leader has failed to show. [48:12.640 --> 48:15.440] The White House is ready for him last night, New Year's Eve, right? [48:15.440 --> 48:20.480] Romney, in a late day event, says he would veto the dream act, giving more opportunity [48:20.480 --> 48:22.800] to immigrants to this country. [48:22.800 --> 48:27.120] The White House jumped on that New Year's Eve, David Daxorot, the President's advisor, tweeting [48:27.120 --> 48:32.560] about it, DNC putting out a press release, they are very aggressive, they are very skilled. [48:32.560 --> 48:36.960] If you're looking for electability, though, again, the only operation out there, right now, [48:36.960 --> 48:40.800] that's got anything like the potential of the scale that the President will bring to this [48:40.800 --> 48:41.800] is Mitt Romney. [48:41.800 --> 48:45.880] I would say he's at the organizational scale as events are like big aircraft carriers. [48:45.880 --> 48:48.120] I have a little problem with a messaging, though. [48:48.120 --> 48:50.320] Here it's all patriotism, it's Tom Sawyer. [48:50.320 --> 48:53.920] I love America, I used to drive through a lot of national parks, you love America, and the [48:53.920 --> 48:57.200] subtext is, you know, you might think I'm a rich guy with a strange religion, but I'm [48:57.200 --> 48:58.200] just like you. [48:58.200 --> 49:02.760] I actually think that's probably not enough to win in a country where people feel it's [49:02.760 --> 49:06.960] in decline, that the scope of his plans are not as big as the scope of the problems, [49:06.960 --> 49:08.600] a problem that also applies to a miracle. [49:08.600 --> 49:09.600] But this week, though, right? [49:09.600 --> 49:10.600] Potentially. [49:10.600 --> 49:11.600] Potentially. [49:11.600 --> 49:13.600] The President is not going to be silent, also. [49:13.600 --> 49:14.600] Right. [49:14.600 --> 49:19.200] We're going to take that on because this is a big issue about whether the President [49:19.200 --> 49:21.680] Obama has measured up as a leader. [49:21.680 --> 49:26.360] I mean, there's real fears of national decline, a sense of the countries on the wrong [49:26.360 --> 49:27.360] track. [49:27.360 --> 49:31.000] This is a campaign about big things, ultimately, for voters. [49:31.000 --> 49:34.880] And the President is trying to respond to that he's actually doing a video message to all [49:34.880 --> 49:36.680] of the Democratic caucus goers. [49:36.680 --> 49:41.480] He wants to be present in some fashion, so he is going to have Democratic caucusing with [49:41.480 --> 49:47.800] a presidential message by video, but the point is that he has not yet found away, he [49:47.800 --> 49:52.800] has not found his voice, and they say that the New York Times story is overwritten that [49:52.800 --> 49:56.360] he's running against Congress that has worked for him in the payroll tax fight, but he [49:56.360 --> 50:00.200] still has to find that message for the state of the union, for whatever his next platform [50:00.200 --> 50:05.000] is going to be, that is obviously the next one, to tell people how the country can be better [50:05.000 --> 50:10.880] at a time where his only economic message can be, it's not as bad as it could have been. [50:10.880 --> 50:11.880] Better than it was. [50:11.880 --> 50:13.480] And the Republicans will make it worse. [50:13.480 --> 50:14.480] They'll take you back. [50:14.480 --> 50:17.880] Yeah, I think, off David's point, there's a really interesting question for Mitt Romney [50:17.880 --> 50:18.880] next week. [50:18.880 --> 50:21.120] I think it's highly likely to stand normal, come out here for a lot of energy, and I'll [50:21.120 --> 50:22.120] be second or first. [50:22.120 --> 50:25.320] But it'll settle down to that, it'll be what the media wants, it'll be the race, and [50:25.320 --> 50:27.680] Rick will come out from the right, quickly, the social right. [50:27.680 --> 50:29.600] If you're running around in the Romney campaign, you've got a choice. [50:29.600 --> 50:32.240] You'll either just grind it out and have a contest on the right. [50:32.240 --> 50:35.480] You say you're pro-life, gay marriage, I say I'm pro-life. [50:35.480 --> 50:38.520] The White House is going to be giggling for three months at that. [50:38.520 --> 50:42.040] Before, do you know you've got the organizational strength in the depths, and Tom, it'll [50:42.040 --> 50:45.960] be like, drinking from a fire hose for him to try to catch up if he comes out of here. [50:45.960 --> 50:46.960] Do you triangulate little thing? [50:46.960 --> 50:50.960] Do you take a few risks in the primary, but do you bounce off, Sam, Tom, to grab the middle [50:50.960 --> 50:54.120] again, which is a much better general election strategy, it's a little risky in a prime. [50:54.120 --> 50:58.000] I'm going to get back to tactics in just a second, but Dave Brooks, stay on this larger [50:58.000 --> 51:02.960] theme, which is the White House, I talk to senior advisors and say, look, we can win the [51:02.960 --> 51:05.800] broader 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 --> 51:11.160] What is the vision that we're learning about of this Republican party? [51:11.160 --> 51:13.840] Well, it's a vision that thinks the government is too big. [51:13.840 --> 51:18.600] It's become the government party, and the thing which I think San Torne brings to the table, [51:18.600 --> 51:22.560] which the others don't talk about as well, is community and values. [51:22.560 --> 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 --> 51:35.760] That's been lacking from what has become a very libertarian anti-tax economic-only party, [51:35.760 --> 51:37.960] and it is in danger of reverting back into that sort of. [51:37.960 --> 51:41.520] So Kathy, what are the storylines that come out of Tuesday, as you see them? [51:41.520 --> 51:43.440] Well, I think that there's a couple of things. [51:43.440 --> 51:47.720] One that we're very interested in here in Iowa is just how are the Iowa caucuses viewed [51:47.720 --> 51:51.560] nationally, and the results here will feed into that discussion. [51:51.560 --> 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 San Torne. [51:59.160 --> 52:02.960] That's something that we're worried about, and some Republicans are worried about that. [52:02.960 --> 52:08.120] And finally, I think that the question then is, you know, how do the conservative [52:08.120 --> 52:10.320] spare in the future here in Iowa? [52:10.320 --> 52:11.320] Mark Halpern. [52:11.320 --> 52:15.920] We have every time Mitt Romney's been challenged in this process, his very well-skilled opposition [52:15.920 --> 52:18.920] research team has killed the person who's challenged them. [52:18.920 --> 52:20.680] The killed Rick Perry, the killed New Keers. [52:20.680 --> 52:24.000] They haven't lifted a finger to kill Rick San Torne, and if he does come out of here, [52:24.000 --> 52:27.520] and it's Mike's right, it's perceived at least in the short term as a two-person race, [52:27.520 --> 52:30.640] he may not have to choose between triangulation and competing on the right. [52:30.640 --> 52:34.400] But they may just tactically kill Rick San Torne with an opposition research file that's [52:34.400 --> 52:35.400] like this. [52:35.400 --> 52:38.120] That's what I predict will happen, and then the question will be, can San Torne survive [52:38.120 --> 52:39.120] that? [52:39.120 --> 52:42.320] Does he have the skill and the ability to fight back, because he won't have the infrastructure, [52:42.320 --> 52:45.680] he won't have the money, he's talked about with you, he won't have the big endorsements [52:45.680 --> 52:47.680] on the people backing him to help. [52:47.680 --> 52:52.920] I mean, almost $17 million spent in blanketing the airwaves here in Iowa, these [52:52.920 --> 52:58.080] outside groups, these superpacks, are pounding, and they did it without Romney, right, having [52:58.080 --> 52:59.080] to lift a finger. [52:59.080 --> 53:03.240] And the fact that Romney is not perceived, there is no blowback, as there has been in past [53:03.240 --> 53:08.320] campaigns, because of the, you know, Citizens United Supreme Court decision, which now has [53:08.320 --> 53:13.080] opened the door for these superpacks to come in, and they just killed Gingrich, just pummeled [53:13.080 --> 53:20.020] him, not that he might not have self-destructed anyway, but they just went after him hammer [53:20.020 --> 53:22.120] and tong, and Mitt Romney doesn't get the blame. [53:22.120 --> 53:23.120] So Romney doesn't get the blame. [53:23.120 --> 53:24.120] So Romney doesn't get the blame. [53:24.120 --> 53:25.120] So Romney doesn't get the blame. [53:25.120 --> 53:27.120] So Romney doesn't get the blame. [53:27.120 --> 53:28.120] So Romney doesn't get the blame. [53:28.120 --> 53:30.120] What's the storyline Wednesday morning that we're covering? [53:30.120 --> 53:33.120] Who the hell is Santorum? [53:33.120 --> 53:34.120] But there's a point about this. [53:34.120 --> 53:35.120] It's not just the superpacks. [53:35.120 --> 53:39.560] And easier to crush a guy of negative ads in one state than in 10, Santorum is, I think, [53:39.560 --> 53:42.080] a lot more competitive than a Rom Paul would be. [53:42.080 --> 53:43.080] But it's the media. [53:43.080 --> 53:46.840] The media works like the Jurassic Park Nine of Swords, 30 feet tall, huge teeth, all [53:46.840 --> 53:49.920] do respect, not always the biggest brain, and it follows movement. [53:49.920 --> 53:53.600] And when it sees movement, Rick Santorum, it stops over there and tries to eat Rick [53:53.600 --> 53:54.600] Santorum. [53:54.600 --> 53:55.600] And that's what next week is going to be like. [53:55.600 --> 53:58.720] He's going to be the happiest guy in the world, I think Tuesday night Wednesday. [53:58.720 --> 54:02.560] He's got a stand in his head, drink from a fire hose without drowning, and learn Chinese [54:02.560 --> 54:04.840] in one week to roll this thing out nationally. [54:04.840 --> 54:05.840] Not impossible. [54:05.840 --> 54:06.840] He's going to be hard. [54:06.840 --> 54:07.840] And he's going to get looked at hard. [54:07.840 --> 54:08.840] One of the weird things. [54:08.840 --> 54:10.560] I mean, Mike thinks we have small brains. [54:10.560 --> 54:13.160] But Rick Santorum really hates us sometimes. [54:13.160 --> 54:16.040] And when Santorum ran a bad campaign, which he did when he could try to get re-elected [54:16.040 --> 54:18.840] in Pennsylvania, it's because he got obsessed with the media. [54:18.840 --> 54:21.960] He got very sour and then he self-destructed. [54:21.960 --> 54:24.120] And we'll see how temperamentally he reacts to this sort of time. [54:24.120 --> 54:27.560] Where does this thing get decided, Andrea? [54:27.560 --> 54:32.160] It could get decided in South Carolina or Florida, if not sooner. [54:32.160 --> 54:36.760] Let's look at the calendar to remind people where we go as we move forward. [54:36.760 --> 54:43.080] Tuesday, of course, the Iowa caucuses, you know, Hampshire primary is January 10th of the [54:43.080 --> 54:48.480] following Tuesday, January 21st, the South Carolina, January 31st, Florida. [54:48.480 --> 54:50.520] Mark, this is a busy January. [54:50.520 --> 54:55.640] Is this auger for it being wrapped up in January or just become a drawn out 2008, like [54:55.640 --> 54:56.640] a fair? [54:56.640 --> 55:01.920] Unless someone can beat Mitt Romney in one of the first four or two of the first four, [55:01.920 --> 55:04.200] I think it's wrapped up by the state of the union. [55:04.200 --> 55:07.640] If he's caught, and he shows a lot of weakness, that's a different story. [55:07.640 --> 55:09.840] But there's no indication of that right now. [55:09.840 --> 55:13.440] See, if he wins, no Hampshire, and he wins Florida. [55:13.440 --> 55:15.080] That's a neck break on everybody else. [55:15.080 --> 55:18.320] Not impossible to win to delegate count is later, but I think he is a commanding front [55:18.320 --> 55:20.640] of the day after the Florida primary, if he has a strong thick. [55:20.640 --> 55:23.080] How long are bulls his president Obama? [55:23.080 --> 55:24.080] He's vulnerable. [55:24.080 --> 55:27.120] I'd say he's now a slight underdog, very slight. [55:27.120 --> 55:29.920] The economy's going to be terrible, who knows what's going to happen to Europe. [55:29.920 --> 55:30.920] So he's peaceful. [55:30.920 --> 55:32.920] But hopefully he doesn't have the strongest opposition in the world. [55:32.920 --> 55:34.760] Kathy, you're on the ground here in Iowa. [55:34.760 --> 55:36.200] Who's going to win this thing? [55:36.200 --> 55:38.160] You know, I can't predict it. [55:38.160 --> 55:41.800] It's too fast moving, but I will predict that a lot of people are going to pick up their [55:41.800 --> 55:45.800] mind on caucus night, and a very well could be his prize. [55:45.800 --> 55:48.400] All right, we'll leave it there, thank you all very much. [55:48.400 --> 55:53.200] Before we go a programming note, next Sunday morning is our live NBC News Facebook Republican [55:53.200 --> 55:56.040] presidential debate right here on Meet the Press. [55:56.040 --> 56:00.400] The final debate before the New Hampshire primary for the past month, we've been asking [56:00.400 --> 56:04.080] New Hampshire Facebook users what the most important issue is. [56:04.080 --> 56:09.160] I'm Aran, overwhelming majority, as you might suspect 58% say it is, in fact, the economy. [56:09.160 --> 56:13.440] So if you have a question, you'd like to ask in the debate, go to our Facebook page that's [56:13.440 --> 56:17.760] 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 --> 56:21.760] I'll be on the ground here in Iowa through the caucuses, and then on to New Hampshire [56:21.760 --> 56:22.760] reporting on the primary. [56:22.760 --> 56:27.360] We'll be back next week with our live presidential candidate debate. [56:27.360 --> 56:37.560] If it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press. [56:37.560 --> 56:43.200] I want to get one free on everything this store, including big and tall sizes, you know, [56:43.200 --> 56:46.200] like the way you look, I guarantee it. [56:46.200 --> 56:48.000] I have a cold. [56:48.000 --> 56:50.120] I took day quilt, but my dose is so ready. [56:50.120 --> 56:52.360] Truth is, day quilt doesn't treat that. [56:52.360 --> 56:53.360] Really? [56:53.360 --> 56:56.960] Alcus also plus fights your worst cold symptoms, plus it relieves your runny nose. [56:56.960 --> 56:57.960] Awesome. [56:57.960 --> 56:58.960] Yes, it is. [56:58.960 --> 57:01.560] That's the cold truth. [57:01.560 --> 57:03.960] Who is neutral system successful? [57:03.960 --> 57:07.960] If you're tired of being overweight, if you're getting into shape for the first time, [57:07.960 --> 57:11.960] or you need to get back into shape and stay in shape, get on it. [57:11.960 --> 57:17.160] Introducing new, neutral system success, our most complete program ever, designed to take [57:17.160 --> 57:19.960] the way it off, and help keep it off. [57:19.960 --> 57:22.280] The reason neutral system success works. [57:22.280 --> 57:26.360] It gives you exactly what you need. [57:26.360 --> 57:31.560] Nutri-system success offers over 130 delicious food choices and quality nutrition [57:31.560 --> 57:33.400] delivered to your door. [57:33.400 --> 57:35.400] There is a secret to success. [57:35.400 --> 57:37.400] You can't wish for what you want. [57:37.400 --> 57:38.400] Hope for what you want. [57:38.400 --> 57:42.400] You have to have a plan, and then you have to get on. [57:42.400 --> 57:46.400] I have a message for anyone who is ever struggling with us. [57:46.400 --> 57:48.400] Make neutral system success your plan. [57:48.400 --> 57:51.400] I'm on it, and I've already seen results. [57:51.400 --> 57:55.400] Order now to get special introductory pricing and our new chef's table [57:55.400 --> 58:03.400] countries free plus save 20% on your entire order. [58:03.400 --> 58:31.400] Thank you for watching. [58:33.400 --> 58:43.400] And does all you want? [58:43.400 --> 58:47.400] Now there's no need to hold back. [58:47.400 --> 58:49.400] New Revolutionary Scoop Dual Blast. [58:49.400 --> 58:53.400] A glittery strong food orders leaving your bread and minty fresh. [58:53.400 --> 58:55.400] So there's no trace of levity. [58:55.400 --> 58:59.400] A new Scoop Dual Blast. [58:59.400 --> 59:03.400] We're about taking a first step that we find so compelling. [59:03.400 --> 59:07.400] Is it because taking a step represents hope? [59:07.400 --> 59:11.400] Or triumph? [59:11.400 --> 59:16.400] A gen worth we believe in taking small steps every day to keep your promises, protect [59:16.400 --> 59:20.400] what matters, and prepare for a secure financial future. [59:20.400 --> 59:24.400] No matter where you want to go, one step at a time is the only way to get there. [59:24.400 --> 59:27.400] Go to gen worth.com promises. [59:27.400 --> 59:30.400] Whoa, this is not the number we talked about. [59:30.400 --> 59:32.400] That's our phone number. [59:32.400 --> 59:35.400] No surprise pricing is one thing that makes Pearl Vision different. [59:35.400 --> 59:36.400] And here's something else. [59:36.400 --> 59:39.400] Buy pair of eyeglasses or prescription sunglasses, and we'll give you another pair free. [59:39.400 --> 59:42.400] Visit PearlVision.com for a store near you. [59:42.400 --> 59:56.400] Don't our dogs deserve to eat fresher, blessed processed foods? [59:56.400 --> 01:00:14.400] Just like we do? Introducing fresh pet.