>> schieffer: today on "face the nation," all roads lead to iowa and it's a wild ride. last night's republican debate in iowa was a brawl, and newt gingrich took the hardest hit. michele bachmann gave the frontrunners a new name. >> if you look at "newt romney," they were for "obamacare"... >> he's been on different positions on so many issues. >> i've always kind of been of the opinion that if you cheat on your wife, you'll cheat on your business partner. >> schieffer: gingrich did not take it lying down. >> the only reason you didn't become a career politician is you lost to teddy kennedy in 1994. >> schieffer: mitt romney is betting big on himself, and left no doubt about it. >> i'll tell you what. $10,000? $10,000 bet?

>> i'm not in the betting business. >> schieffer: in a time when many are out of work, will romney regret that? bet you the comics don't. they were already having a field day. >> that's what's so crazy. republicans are up newt creek without a paddle. >> schieffer: believe it or not, gingrich was already flexing his muscles for "newsweek". michele bachmann, who was on the stage last night, is up early this morning to tell us why she hopes it won't be gingrich. and we'll hear from iowa congressman steve king, whose endorsement in the iowa campaign could be crucial. plus a preview of steve kroft's "60 minutes" interview with president obama, and analysis from cbs news chief white house correspondent norah o'donnell and political director john dickerson. then, we'll have an important announcement about "face the nation." it all starts now. captioning sponsored by cbs from cbs news in washington, "face the nation"

with bob schieffer. >> schieffer: good morning again. congresswoman michele bachmann who was on fire during the debate last night is joining us from des moines this morning. congresswoman, appreciate you getting up early. to come in and be with us. i want to ask you this question. it just struck me last night watching the debate. you're a social conservative, but when newt gingrich's three marriages came up, all the other candidates just jumped right on it. you did not make any direct criticism or reference to him about that. i just wonder why that was. >> well, i was asked a question about character and what that meant for the presidency of the united states. i went back to what the founders said, and the founders said we needed to focus on their character. that was my response. >> schieffer: so do you think that is an important issue, and should be an issue out there on the table, his marriages? >> i think it's one that voters

will take a look at because they want to know who the person is, what the measure of the man or the woman is. i'm sure that that will be a factor, as well. >> schieffer: you know, in an interview that president obama did with steve kroft this week, it's going to be seen tonight on "60 minutes"-- the president said he thought all you republican candidates were alike. listen to this. >> it doesn't really matter who the nominee is going to be. the core philosophy that they're expressing is the same. and the contrast in visions between where i want to take the country and where they say they want to take the country is going to be stark. and the american people are going to have a good choice. it's going to be a good debate. >> schieffer: you did take a slightly different line about that last night. in fact, you called the two frontrunners-- romney and gingrich-- you referred them at one point as "newt romney." are you different from them? >> without a shadow of a doubt. i'm the only proven consistent

constitutional conservative in this race on issue after issue. that's what i was pointing out last night. newt gingrich and mitt romney, it is very clear that there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two of them, because both of them have advocated for the health care mandate. in newt gingrich's case, for 20 years. in mitt romney's case, he's the only governor in the united states' history to put into place "socialized" medicine. they both agree with barack obama. this is the seminal piece of legislation of barack obama. it's the one issue that our candidate has to take president obama on with, and they won't be able to debate him on this issue because they're on the same side as the president. but also newt romney are on the same side of the president when it comes to cap-and-trade, the $700 billion bailout, illegal immigration, even the payroll tax this week, which there isn't one shred of evidence that that has created a single job.

when you take a look, and people say this is a two-man race, i would agree. but the one man is newt romney and the other man is michele bachmann, the only proven consistent constitutional conservative. i'm the only one that can take the debate to barack obama and win and be elected. >> schieffer: i'm going to separate newt romney into two people again just to ask you this next question. you know, suddenly, newt gingrich has surged to the top. eugene robinson, the columnist for the "washington post," wrote the other day, this guy is carrying more baggage than luis vitton. do you think that this baggage is going to hurt... i mean, if newt gingrich got the nomination, do you think he could take the whole party down? >> i think there's very serious concerns about newt gingrich as the nominee. this is starting to get unpacked. we know he's taken over $100 million. his offices are on the rodeo

drive of washington called k street. he's the king of k-street. for a person who has been influence peddling for over 30 years in washington d.c. to think that newt gingrich is somehow an outsider, when he's the consummate establishment insider, he's the big government candidate just like mitt romney is the big government candidate, that's not what we want in our nominee. it doesn't even survive the... we have to have a candidate who is going to stand for our issues and our values and be a true, proven constitutional conservative. barack obama knows me in washington d.c. because i've taken him on. i've been on the tip of the spear fighting him on "obamacare", on cap-and-trade, on issue after issue. there's a clear distinction in the candidates. i'm the proven candidate who has been tested by fire in the lion's den of washington d.c. >> schieffer: let me ask you this question about the other half of newt romney. that is mitt romney. why do you think he is having such a problem?

he got to about 20% with voters, but he just can't seem to get away from that. we continue to see others come and go as the alternative to romney. what's his problem? >> well, i think it's because when you look at mitt romney's record, you see someone who has stood firm for "socialized" medicine. last night on the stage, again, he was supporting and agreeing with himself for "socialized" medicine. the american people don't agree with that. he also was for cap-and-trade and for the $700 billion bailout. when it comes to issue after issue, mitt romney is not reflective of where the base of this party wants to go. they want small government. mitt romney has been an advocate of big government. we can't afford big government anymore. we're overspent. we're $15 trillion in debt. both mitt romney and newt gingrich represent the big government frugal "socialist" wing of the party.

i represent the true constitutional conservative wing of our party. >> schieffer: if it came down to it, could you see yourself supporting either one of these men if they got the nomination? >> well, the one thing we know is we won't have barack obama as our president. because the american people have made that decision. but what they want is a true bold, distinct difference. there's no candidate on that stage last night, bob, that has more of a bold, distinct difference than i have. i can hold barack obama accountable on every issue because i've been fighting him consistently during his presidency on this issue. >> schieffer: just yes or no, though. could you support either one of them if it came down to one of them? >> well, i intend to be the nominee. i'm not giving up. i fully intend to be the nominee of our party. >> schieffer: all right. you seem to have hurt donald trump's feelings somewhere along the way here. he said what is it about loyalty that you've been trying to get his endorsement. all of a sudden he wants to have a debate and moderate it and you turned him down. that's that all about? >> oh, donald trump is a big

boy. these things happen. clearly, there is an attempt to have a debate. no one was taking the bait to come to this debate. at a certain point, it didn't even make any sense for me to go to it either. only newt gingrich and rick santorum said they were going to go. clearly, it wasn't going to be a debate. i'm a serious candidate for the republican nomination for president of the united states. we need to have a debate where everyone is participating. >> schieffer: all right. i thank you very much, ms. bachmann, for joining us this morning. i hope we'll see you again down the trail. >> thank you, bob. >> schieffer: you may think you've been seeing a lot of republican candidates, but not as many as iowa republican congressman steve king. he has been campaigning with about all of them as they seek his support in next month's caucus. congressman king is also joining us this morning from des moines. congressman, you were there last night. who do you think won that debate? >> i could not pick a winner, bob. i walked in there and i looked at all the candidates on the

stage. i kind of checked them mentally. i decided i liked them all. when the debate was over, i liked them all more. i did expect it would be a political "king of the hill" type of a debate with newt gingrich on top of the hill and romney fairly high up in the polls. i thought the shots would come from the wings. some of that happened. we'll see how much that resonates as this discussion goes through iowa. >> schieffer: you had said kind of the beginning of all of this that you did plan to give an endorsement to someone. but this week, you told the "washington post," and i think these are your words, "no full spectrum conservative has emerged in the field." does that mean you may not endorse? >> well, it doesn't mean they're not out there. it's the emergence definition is the question. i'll just be, you know, as straight honest with you on what's going on inside of me. i have to come to a conviction. just like these candidates come to a conviction to run for president, i need to come to a conviction to get fully behind a single candidate.

that's what's holding me back. i hope to get there. i will tell you that there's another breadth of this that i think needs to be addressed. that is the big picture of america's economic situation, the size and the scope of our debt. what we're going to do about that. can one of these candidates actually sell the tough medicine we're going to have to take to get this country fixed before we go off the cliff? will they be able to sell that to the american people so that that mandate can actually get this done? i hope we can get to that point before this is over, bob. >> schieffer: could you see yourself endorsing michele bachmann? i mean, i would guess she's conservative enough for you. >> michelle and i are right down the same, issue after issue. we worked together on repealing "obamacare". i'm one of the first to sign on to repeal dodd-frank legislation. the answer to that is, yes, but i haven't come to the conviction. that's what holds me back, bob. >> schieffer: let me ask you the question that i just asked ms. bachmann.

that is, why is romney having such a hard time? he has a great resume as a businessman and all of that. he's obviously a good, strong person of good character. and yet, there just seems to be a large segment of the republican party that, for want of a better phrase, just doesn't like him. why do you think that is? >> that's a hard thing to measure. i've watched mitt romney for about five years. he built a good organization in this state four years ago and good media organization. that hasn't happened to the extent this year. but i think mitt romney was unjustly marked down for his religion last time. i hope that's not happening this time. he's a better candidate this time than he was four years ago. but sometimes, you can measure all the pieces, where they are on issues and how they are on debate. and the list of those things goes on. but sometimes, it's just an intangible. i don't know that iowans have warmed up to him in the fashion that one would think, given his positions on the issue. he has a great family too, bob.

>> schieffer: what about newt gingrich? he does carry some baggage. even newt gingrich would concede that. could it drag down the party if he got the nomination? >> there is that risk. newt has shown himself to be very, very strong in these debates. i think that's the foundation of the strength that he has in the polls. then, you'll see some things come out that are just unpredictable. his statement on the palestinian question, which i generally agree with, by the way, was surprise, it was unpredictable, and probably unnecessary in the scope of this campaign. same with immigration. so you wonder what kind of discipline he might have, but he is clearly hands down the one who has got the most breadth, the most depth and the most understanding of policy and the most solutions to put forward. but it's risky to go forward in the fashion that he has. when you're blazing a trail, when you're on top of the polls, that tends to be a high liability. >> schieffer: do you think that somebody else might get into the race? in fact, would you want anyone else to get into the race at this point?

>> if i knew who that was, i could answer that question a little better. but i just don't know at this point. if there's someone who emerges that could actually sweep this field and unify republicans and this constitutional conservative, i think that could be a good thing. chris christie, for example, is one of those people. but he's made it clear he's not running. if there's another name out there that might be able to answer that question a little more... a little better information. >> schieffer: all right. congressman, thank you so much for joining us. we hope we'll talk to you again before we get to the iowa caucuses. >> thank you, bob. >> schieffer: we'll be back in one minute with a little analysis of all of this.

>> schieffer: joining me now, to ... two stars of our cbs news political team chief white house correspondent norah o'donnell and political director john dickerson.

john, this was a turning point in this campaign, i think, even before this brawl they had last night out in iowa. >> you're right. this is the week newt gingrich shot through the roof. he is in three of the first four republican contests, he's beating mitt romney by almost 20 points in iowa, south carolina and florida. the romney team had been kind of ignoring gingrich, training their fire on the president. the big ship "romney" turned on gingrich this week. there were attacks by supporters from mitt romney on gingrich. there were talking points put out. suddenly, the in-box and the email of any reporter filled up with attacks on gingrich. then we saw last night that the candidate himself engaged. the main point is that he is unstable, that gingrich is just going to explode at some point, and that he has so much baggage that the white house and the president are going to delight in attacking gingrich, making the general election all about him and his problems, instead of making the general election about... >> schieffer: you know, having said all of that, i thought he came off pretty well last night in this debate.

i mean, i would say that, in some ways, newt gingrich may have won even though most of the fire was directed at him. >> and that is the problem with this romney attack. they say he's out of control. he's undisciplined. then, in these debates, he looks disciplined. the hard edges are off. he looks in command of what he's supposed to know. it's why in these polls he wins by huge margins over romney on the question of who can be commander in chief, who can handle a crisis? who is the most prepared? i mean, he wins right on down the line. this week, we saw in the polls that he also goes into romney territory. two points romney was running on-- "i can handle the economy and i can beat barack obama." that is no longer true in the polls. voters think gingrich can do those things. >> schieffer: over at the white house, it's no secret they really want to run against newt. they are aiming their fire at mitt romney. it was a big week over there, too. kind of a turning point. >> no doubt. i think these debates are like presents under the christmas tree for president obama. they want more and more americans to watch these debates

where mitt romney managed to make a mistake where he said he would bet $10,000 with rick perry. the democratic national committee was delighted by that remark. they got it trending worldwide on twitter. "what 10-k would buy," essentially. then they had newt gingrich delivering their best line of attack on mitt romney when newt gingrich said to mitt romney the "only reason you're not a career politician is because you lost to ted kennedy." that has been one of the central focuses of democratic national committee is to paint not only mitt romney as a flip-flopper, but as a career politician someone who has been running for office for 20 years. >> schieffer: they're shifting some of it toward gingrich. >> absolutely. in fact, the democratic national committee just this morning put out their first web ad attacking newt gingrich. i talked to a senior advisor to the president this morning that said they were surprised that gingrich made it to the top of the polls. i think david axelrod said this morning that they thought or said this week that they thought

newt gingrich had been left for dead at the tiffany counter. they're not going to give up on newt gingrich. but make no mistake, they want this race to last a long time. they won't deliver the fatal blow on newt gingrich. they want to drag on so it saps mitt romney's strength and drains his coffers. >> schieffer: but barack obama has his work cut out for him, whoever the nominee is. >> he absolutely does. one of the dangers you hear from some democrats is they want this to be a long, bloody struggle so the nominee is ultimately damaged. but one of the things that newt gingrich may be able to do is talk about the president and his failures in an articulate way that a lot of people can watch. he's essentially a long string of attacks on the president. and the president's approval rating in our latest poll is at 44%; 33% on the economy. that's his lowest number ever. people think the country is going in the wrong direction. that number 44 on approval usually the strategists say that the president's approval rating has to be at about 50 to get re-elected.

so, he's got a lot of work to do there. >> these numbers are like a ball and chain for the president. i think they acknowledge that. the larger contours of this race are very difficult for president obama because two thirds of americans don't think he's done enough to fix the economy. his ratings, as john just said, on the economy are awful. the central thing that voters are going to vote on is, who can best fix the economy? is it going to be president obama, or is it going to be the republican? that debate will come later. we saw this week, president obama with a big speech, he's going to be talking about it on "60 minutes," trying to begin this narrative that is laying out the clear distinctions between himself and the republicans. >> schieffer: if there was anything that told you in our poll that the president has some work to do, 66% of the people we polled in that poll said they had no idea what the president plans to do if indeed he is re-elected. that means he has a lot to explain. we'll be back in a moment with some final thoughts.

thanks to both of you.

>> schieffer: finally today it's another mean campaign unfolds, i get this question a lot. why would anyone put themselves through the abuse that comes with running for or serving in office? well, for some, anyway, i think

the answer is "it's the money, stupid." running for office has become a great way to make a fortune. you know longer even have to leave office to cash in. a "60 minutes" expose revealed that congress has carved out a provision which allows its members to use insider information gathered in their official capacities to buy and sell their own stocks and bonds. democrats and republicans are doing it. reforms are promised but not yet passed. for other congress members, the "when does life begin, comes answer to the old question, "when does life begin, comes when they do leave office. even those driven from office under a cloud can wind up making millions as lobbyists. sarah palin didn't even get to washington and became a multi- million dollar industry. there is no end to the ways money can be made just campaigning. candidates sometimes pay themselves salaries out of campaign funds. the "washington post" reports that newt gingrich charged his own campaign $42,000 to use his personal rolodex of potential

donors. critics said herman cain wasn't really running for president, just selling books and campaigning for a job on cable tv. well, his campaign crashed but it may have been a sound business plan. the "new york times" reports that fox may be interested in hiring him and quotes a fox official as saying, "he's interesting." well, aren't they all. back in a minute with a special announcement.

>> schieffer: i cannot remember when i've been happier to break a story than i am to tell you this. cbs news will announce tomorrow that "face the nation" will become a one-hour broadcast next year, beginning in april. this is happening because more and more of you have been tuning to "face the nation" during this campaign season. so we thank you. you made it possible. we don't plan to change a thing, no bells and whistles. we'll just keep sitting the key newsmakers down, turning on the lights up there, and asking them questions. then, we'll bring in the experts from in and outside cbs news for analysis. we'll just have more time to do it. we'll do our best to keep asking the questions you want answered.

again, thank you for making this happen. and we'll see you right here next week. captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org