i'm contessa brewer. that's all for this edition of "caught on camera. this sunday, our exclusive, live interview with speaker of the house john boehner. the senate passes a bill to extend the payroll tax cut, but it's only for two months. now, all eyes are on the house. >> it's my expectation that -- for congress not to further extend this middle-class tax cut for the rest of the year. >> we'll hear from the speaker about this battle and the year of dysfunction in washington over taxes. with americans madder than ever at congress. then the race for the white house. michele bachmann as she makes her final push to win iowa and take on front runter newt gingrich. >> i'm a serious candidate for

president of the united states. and my facts are accurate. >> plus, mitt romney picks up a big endorsement in the key early state of south carolina. >> michael and i absolutely, in every way, support governor mitt romney for president of the united states. >> and so this morning we'll talk to governor nikki haley in south carolina about why she's behind romney. finally, the major moments on the campaign trail this weekend. what they mean, as voting is just around the corner. analysis from republican strategist mike murphy. and "washington post" columnist e.j. dionne. good morning. the a.p. news alert last night at 11:31 eastern time, u.s. military says last american troops have left iraq, as war ends. and with that, a conclusion to the nine-year war in iraq, a

mission costing nearly 4,500 american lives, and $800 billion. back home another congressional showdown. the senate has passed a short-term extension of the payroll tax cut, but the measure is now facing strong opposition from some rank and file republicans in the house, leaving final passage in doubt. that is where we begin this morning with our exclusive guest, the speaker of the house, john boehner. mr. spoker, welcome back. >> david. good to be here. >> so, what's going to happen? >> well, it's pretty clear that i, and our members, oppose the senate bill. it's only for two months. you know, the president said we shouldn't go on vacation until we get our work done. and frankly, house republicans agree. we passed a one-year extension of the payroll tax credit, unemployment insurance with reforms, making sure that those doctors who treat medicare patients are not going to see their reimbursements cut. we had a reasonableesponsible bill that we sent over to the senate. and, you know, if you talk to

employers, they talk about the uncertainty. how can you do tax policy for two months? so, we really do believe it's time for the senate to work with the house, to complete our business for the year. we've got two weeks to get this done. let's do it the right way. >> so you're suggesting start over, make this a one-year extension, should the senate start from scratch? >> no. what i'm suggesting is this, the house has passed its bill. now the senate has passed its bill. and, you know, under the constitution, when we have these disagreements, there could be a formal conference between the house and senate to resolve our differences. but our members really do believe, we have to do our work. the president said we shouldn't be going on vacation without getting our work done. let's get our work done, let's do this for a year. and earlier this week, both the house and senate, in a bipartisan, bicamperal way, funded our government through september 30th. we did it in a regular process, regular order, and what the regular order here is a formal

conference between the house and senate. >> but it's important to reiterate, as speaker of the house, you are opposed to this senate bill, to this compromise. >> i believe that two months is just kicking the can down the road. the american people are tired of that. frankly, i'm tired of it. on the house side we've seen this kind of action before coming out of the senate. it's time to just stop, do our work, resolve thedifferences, and extend this for one year. >> well, but -- >> every move is uncertainty. >> resolving differences is about the hardest thing to do, it seems, in washington, and it's been that way all year long. what do you ve? where do you compromise in order to get the votes to extend this for a year? >> oh, i think if you look at the house-passed bill, we did everything the president asked for. we had a couple of policies that we believed would help create jobs in america. things like the keystone pipeline, pulling back some regulations on boilers, but we paid for this, offset it, with reasonable reductions in spending. 90% of those reductions, frankly, the president agrees

with. and so we can -- we can find common ground. it's just the usual, let's just punt. kick the can down the road, we'll come back and do it later. >> but you won't accept kicking this off until february. you want to get it done now? >> i think we should do it all right now. >> i want to ask you about pipeline. i want to remind our viewers what we're talking about. this is a proposed extension of an oil pipeline that starts up in canada, goes down to the gulf of mexico. you want to say, look, we'll extend it for the year if the president makes a quicker decision on this pipeline. white house officials i've talked to say you are guaranteeing that he'll say no to this, because the state department has already said they can't get the review done for the extension in that amount of time. >> that's nonsense. david, it's been going on for three years. all the studies are done. it's gone through every part of the regulatory process. the oy issue here is that the president doesn't want to have to make this decision until after his election. 20,000 direct jobs, 100,000 indirect jobs, to build a pipeline from canada down to the

gulf, that would help our energy security. help produce more energy here in north america. this is the right thing to do. the american people support it. and the president shouldn't continue to just put this off for his own election convenience. >> but you think the state department was misrepresenting the fact that they can't do a review when there's not even a proposed extension that's finalallized yet by the company involved? >> this was about to be approved last summer. so waiting and waiting and waiting is not the answer here. it is time to proceed with the pipeline. >> if you really wanted this, and not just the political issue, wouldn't you make it possible for the president to have as much time as he needs to make the decision? >> he's already had ample time. he's just kicking this can down the road, same washington nonsense, because it may anger some people in his base. >> let's talk about the economy overall. and unemployment around the country. and in your own state of ohio, friday job numbers were out showing that the unemployment rate in ohio down to 8.5%. down from 9% in october. it's the largest one-month drop

since 1983. unemployment nationally is down from where it was two years ago. do you think the president's policies deserve credit? >> i don't think the president's policies have anything to do with this. and the fact is, the reason these numbers are coming down is that more people are leaving the workforce, leaving the search for a job, and as a result, you've got less people in the labor pool. and so, you asked americans how they feel about the economy, and they're going to look at you and say, where are the jobs? >> but you don't see a positive trend here, not even in your own state? >> i think that the economy's bubbling along. and while some job growth certainly is welcomed, the fact of the matter is, is the president's policies continue to hold back our economy. >> but if you see -- >> all the regulations, no action on the debt, the stimulus didn't work. washington could do more. mostly, it's get out of the way. >> but if you see unemployment continue in a trend downward,

that jobless rate, if it continues to go down, you don't think it will be more difficult for republicans to make the case on the economy against this president? >> well, listen, i think the next election is going to be a referendum on the economy. and the president's policies regarding the economy. and if, in fact, that's the case, i think the president has a tough road ahead of him. >> we talk about dysfunction in washington. and here are the numbers to bear this out. job approval for congress, at an all-time low of 9% 383% disapproval. honesty and ethical standards of people in different fields is something that gallu measures. look at that. nurses fare pretty well. journalists at 26%. members of congress at 7%. when you fall below journalists, i think you're in serious trouble. but all kidding aside, are you not disappointed and embarrassed by those numbers? >> well, david, welcome to divided government. you know, republicans have the majority in the house, but democrats have majority in the senate, and we've got a democrat in the white house. we have honest, philosophical

differences about the way forward. and so it's not a great surprise to me that when we get into these philosophical discussions, and these debates, and we don't agree, people don't like watching that. my job is to find enough common ground between the parties to do the right thing for the american people. >> you say common ground. that's not what the president says. he told "60 minutes" something else. a fundamental choice, he said, was made by republicans. this is what he told steve croft. >> you can't get republicans to move, partly because they made a political, strategic decision that says, anything obama's for, we're against. because that's our best chance of winning an election. but, keep in mind, i'm talking about republican members of congress. i'm not talking about republicans around the country. >> what do you say to that? >> i absolutely disagree with that. we have honest differences with the president, and he knows it. and the fact is, is that i've worked all year to try to take those differences and set them aside, and to find enough common

ground to help our economy, and to try to help americans get back to work. this is not about the next election. i told the president that earlier this year. the election will take care of itself. our job, his job and my job, is to find common ground, to do the right thing for the country every day. >> but have you given up on this president? do you effectively say, look, i can't get anything done with him. let's wait and see if there's a republican elected? >> i'm not that smart. look, i never give up. and i'll never give up on this president, or give up on this process. to try to help do what the american people sent us here to do. try to resolve our differences, find common ground, and move. >> do you trust him as a partner? >> we've had very good discussions. i do trust him. it's not -- we have a tough time coming to an agreement. but the president and i have a very cordial relationship. i hope it will continue. >> does it disappoint you, i mean you talked to the vice president and the president, a number of people who've said publicly, look, the president and boehner, they had a deal, and boehner couldn'sell it

to -- >> no, no, that's absolutely not true. that's not true, david. >> on the debt. >> the president never said yes. he never said yes to making the kind of fundamental reforms to our entitlement programs that's necessary. i told the president, when he asked for revenue, i said i'll put revenue on the table, but only if we get fundamental reform of the entitlement programs. he never said yes. and then came along and decided he even wanted more revenue than what i was willing to do. that's why, it never came to agreement. >> but you've been here aong time, speaker. you're known as a practical legislator, which means you're willing to compromise. have you ever seen anything like that we've seen this year? can't you understand americans who say we have a huge leadership vacuum on both sides in washington? >> well, nobody likes to watch, but people disagree. and we all know when it comes to legislating, there are two things that people should never watch. sausage being made, and laws being made. it's just not a pretty picture. because you've got people with strongly held views.

and i don't -- while i believe strongly what i believe in, other people have a right to believe in what they believe in. again, we've got to put those differences aside, and where's the common ground? where is it that we can agree? and frankly, when it comes to extending the payroll tax credit, when it comes to extending unemployment benefits with reforms, when it comes to taking care of the doctors who treat our medicare patients, we should not hold them hostage to some two-month agreement. we should do this for the full year, like the president asked for. >> what about next year? do you thin you get a debt reduction agreement or does that have to be put off until after the election? >> i believe it's critically important. our debt and our deficit are serving as a wet blanket, hanging over our economy, and frankly hanging over the future for our kids and grandkids. we, as leaders in our country have a responsibility to sit down and find a way to solve our debt crisis. >> let me ask you foreign policy question, we talked about iraq. senator mccain was quite critical of the president on the

senate floor this week as troops are coming out. here's what he said. >> that this decision of a complete pullout of the united states troops from iraq is dictated by politics, and not our national security interests. i believe that history will judge this president's leadership with the scorn and disdain that it deserves. >> is that fair? >> i'm concerned about our very quick and rapid withdrawal from iraq. we've -- we sacrificed a lot of lives, a lot of soldiers injured, a lot of our treasure to go in and free the iraqi people, and to help them build a democracy, built on freedom for all in their country. and with so much that we've accomplished, i would hate to see us risk that for the future. and so i've got concerns, as we move ahead, about the iraqis' ability to safeguard their country and to protect their

borders from those who would want to upend all of this. >> let me ask you about politics. "the week" magazine has newt gingrich on the cover with this question, is newt fit to serve. you know him well, you've served in leadership with him. does he have the temperament? does he have the leadership, to be president? >> david, newt and i have been friends for a long time. as his chief lieutenant bk in the early and mid '90s. but, this presidential race will take care of itself. my job is to be the speaker of the house, is to i've got a big enough job there. i'm not involved in this presidential race at all. >> but you do know him well, and you've seen those who have worked with him really, no one has come forward and endorsed him among the highest profile republican politicians with whom he worked. why not? >> i've got a big job. i'm going to do my job. >> but the issue still is this question of temperament and

discipline. republicans i've talked to said look, he was known as a butterfly in leadership. that he didn't really know how to run anything. don't you think a lot of conservatives out there would like to hear from you about whether he can do it? >> david, a lot of people have tried to draw me in to picking candidates, or saying things about this candidate or that candidate. i'm just not going to do it. i've got a big job to do. i'm trying to run an institution that was designed not to work. my job is to make it work. and to make it work on behalf of the american people. >> you did say about newt gingrich this week that you're not sure he's as conservative as some people think. you said he's conservative, but not as conservative as some people think. what did you mean by that. >> well, you know, newt, if you look for his track record, he's conservative. but he's not right wing bomb thrower like some people would want to portray him. >> but is he the most reliably conservative person in the race? >> there are a lot of good conservatives in the race. >> can you support anybody for president who emerges out of this process? >> i believe that our process will produce a good candidate and i'll support that candidate. >> what do you think is going on in the party?

i spoke to a republican this week who said, you know, the rank and file of the republican party wants to stomp all over the establishment, and newt, in effect, is the weapon of choice. you've dealt with a changing republican party, as speaker, dealing with your own rank and file in the house, after the midterm elections. what's going on inside the party? >> well, what the party wants is they want a smaller, less costly, and more accountable government in washington, d.c. and they'retired of waiting. that's the real issue. government's too big. it's too involved in our lives. it's getting in the way of our economic recovery. and frankly, in my view, it could be getting in the way of the ability of my kids and grand kids, if we ever have any grand kids, to have the chance at the american dream that i've had and that you've had. that's my goal. is to make sure every american has opportunities. but this government, in my view, is just knocking those opptunities out. >> a payroll tax deal before christmas?

>> how about tomorrow? >> you think it will happen? >> i don't know. all i know is that it's time to do this the right way. >> all right. >> it's time to do the right thing for the american people. no kicking the can down the road. >> we'll be watching. speaker boehner, merry christmas. >> merry christmas. >> thank you very much. >> coming up, time is of 9 essence for michele bachmann as the iowa caucuses are just about two weeks away. she's turning up the heat on former and front-runner newt gingrich. she'll join me next live from iowa. plus nikki haley governor of south carolina throws her support behind mitt romney, who's currently trailing front-runner gingrich by double digits in that state. we'll ask her why. next. nyquil: you know i relieve coughs, sneezing, fevers? tylenol: me, too. and nasal congestion. nyquil:what? tissue box (whispering): he said nasal congestion... nyquil: i heard him. anncr vo: tylenol cold multi-symptom nighttime relieves nasal congestion... nyquil cold & flu doesn't.

coming up, can michele bachmann pull off an upset in iowa? i'll ask her next. and can mitt romney attract tea party support after south

we're back. joining me live from our bus tour in iowa, 16 days to go until the caucuses, republican presidential candidate congresswoman michele bachmann of minnesota. congresswoman, welcome back to "meet the press." >> good morning, david. a pleasure to be with you this morning. >> so you heard speaker boehner. my question to you is, under what circumstances would you support an extension of the payroll tax cut through 2012? >> well, i didn't support it a year ago when it was first proposed. and the reason why i didn't is because it -- it denied $111 billion to the social security trust fund. i didn't think that that was a good thing to do last year. i don't think it's a good thing to do this year. and remember, the reason why president obama proposed it in the first place was to create jobs. there isn't one shred of evidence that that created jobs. so it defeated its purpose, plus it put senior citizens at risk by denying the $111 billion to

the social security trust fund. all it's doing is adding to the debt. >> the actuary for social security takes issue with that in terms of accelerating insolvency for social security. and, you know, last summer, during the debt fight, you made the point on this program, that the debt ceiling should not be extended, in your view, because the american people were against extending it. so by that logic, congresswoman, look at the polling, 58% of those polled favor extending the payroll tax cut. >> well, if you go back to last summer, what we should have done is had all 535 members of congress sit down together and deal with this problem of overspending. because the question at that time was, should we raise the credit card limit so that the country can go an additional $2.4 trillion in debt. that's all we're doing right now. we're putting our american people more and more at debt. and i will tell you, all across iowa, all across south carolina, all across new hampshire, people

are so tired of seeing the government put them more in debt. when i came in to congress, in january of 2007, the country was $8.67 trillion in debt. today it's $15 trillion. next year it will be $17 trillion. we're acting like greece and like italy, and that's what people are frustrated with. they want us to ask like a first-world nation. not like what president barack obama is doing. he's acting like we're a banana republic. we've got to get our act together, and stop spending money that we don't have. >> you're not -- i mean you're seriously calling the united states acting like a banana republic compared to the sort of debt issues that the eurozone countries have had? >> what i'm doing is saying that what the decision that barack obama is making, is acting like a banana republic. it's absolutely irresponsible what president obama is doing to get behind measures to incree spending to such a level that we're going in to debt, $1.5 trillion every year. this compares to president

george bush, back in 2007. our debt for the entire year was $160 billion. when we topped that -- >> congresswoman, that misstates the record. the bush presidency -- >> there's no comparison. david, wait a minute. >> no, i just want to stop you for accuracy, congresswoman. >> we're talking ten times -- >> the debt exploded under the bush administration. >> for accuracy -- david. then let me finish. do a comparison. i agre with you that there was too much money that was spent under george bush. but for the year 2007, the debt for the year was $160 billion. the debt for this last year about $1.5 trillion. that's almost ten times more in debt than george bush, and just for the month of -- for the month of i think it's november of this year, it was more than the entire year for t2007. so there's no question that the debt has just skyrocketed under president obama, in comparison

to george bush. >> let me just point out, i don't want to appear to be cutting you off. sometimes the satellite delay can exacerbate that. so i wanted to make sure you could finish your point. >> thank you. >> let me ask you about iowa. what do you have to accomplish. do you have to win iowa in order to keep going in this race? >> well, i'm intending to win iowa. we're working very hard here, and we're seeing the momentum shift in my favor, and we have endorsements coming out from people all across the state. just in the last few days, in the last five days, we've identified 1500 new supporters. so we're adding more and more people all the time. and we think we're going to do very well on january 3rd. >> you've got to take on newt gingrich. he's the front-runner there. in the debate you seemed to have a particularly tough exchange with him about some of the issues in this race. and i'm going to play a portion of that. >> sometimes congresswoman bachmann doesn't get her facts very accurate. >> i think it's outrageous to continue to stay, over and over through the debates that i don't

have my facts right, when as a matter of fact, i do. i'm a serious candidate for president of the united states, and my facts are accurate. >> besides the normal debating of the issues, you took particular exception to the way he was speaking to you that night. do you think he was sickling you out? and why? >> well, i do. it was obvious that he was. in the previous debate, newt gingrich had made a similar charge, and yet politifact came out afterwards and said i was right in what i said. newt gingrich wasn't able to give any contrary argument to the fact that he did take $1.6 million from freddie mac. and he took that money, and then influenced senior republicans to continue the practice of funding freddie mac. i had also pointed out that newt gingri gingrich, himself, had gone to the republican national committee, and had urged them to not pull any financial support from any republican candidates

who were for the barbaric practice of partial birth abortion. he wasn't able to deny either charge. all he was able to do is say that i had my facts wrong. my facts aren't wrong. it's just that he's memory challenged. >> well, you said that he was singling you out. you've also said this week that he sometimes talks to you as if you were a student of his. do you think sexism motivates m? your words were, i am a serious contender for the presidency. >> well, what he sa sounded very condescending. and it sounded like he was talking down to me, as though i was one of his students. i'm not one of his students. as i said, i am a serious candidate for the presidency. if he disagrees with my assertion, then he needs to make that claim and put it on the table. but the fact is, i'm right about him taking $1.6 million for his work on behalf of continuing freddie mac. >> the -- the -- in fairness to speaker gingrich, on the merits, there has been a lot of discussion about some of your assertions in the course of the debates, politifact put out a

statement they did not back up your particular assertions with regard to freddie mac. here in "the des moines register" this morning in e endorsement for mitt romney, there's an observation about you -- >> david, what i said -- >> if i can finish. this is what the des moines register writes this morning, observation about michele bachmann. overall impression, an impressive fireball who can absorb and regurgitate tons of information, even if some of it turns out to be inaccurate. >> well, and the des moines register doesn't say what that inaccuracy would be. they don't point that out. and also, regarding what you just said prior, politifact was regarding my statement regarding health care. i had made a statement regarding health care. they said that that was accurate. i wasn't saying that it was regarding freddie mac. but my comments regarding freddie mac are accurate. >> let me ask you about discussion of the future of the judiciary. this has come up as a big debating point in iowa and on the stage the other night. here is what you said as that

discussion went forward in the debate the other night. >> what we need to do about it is have the -- both the president, and the united states congress, take their authority back. and i would agree with newt gingrich, that i think that the congress and the president of the united states have failed to take their authority, because now we've gotten to the point where we think the final arbiter of law is the court system. it isn't. >> i want to be clear here, would a president bachmann ignore decisions that you disagreed with that were issued by the supreme court? >> no. we don't ignore those decisions. but, again, we need to remember that the united states congress and the president of the united states have the power and authority to pass law. we have the idea that laws are ultimately made by courts today. but that isn't true. the supreme -- the congress, together with the president, can pass law, and change what the supreme court says. they also have -- >> that's a point of fact.

but that's not in dispute, congresswoman. that's never been in dispute. of course congress can pass laws. the issue here is sort of an attack on the judiciary, do you believe that supreme court justices should be elected. were that solve the problem? >> no. no. the -- the constitution is set up the way that it should be. the problem is, the supreme court, or other members of the court, have passed decisions that aren't in conformity with our constitution. that's what we take issue with. that's why it's important that the people have their representatives be able to pass laws, as the president would sign in conformity with their will. what's wrong is when judges make laws in confirmty with their own opinion. they can't make laws, it's the congress and the president that make laws. >> then what's the remedy? how would you inject more accountability into the judiciary? >> well, the best accountability is if judges step across the line, there are -- there are

measures already contained within the constitution, and the congress needs to utilize those measures in the constitution. >> so it would be open season on judges who issue rulings that politicians don't agree with? >> well, what do you mean by that? >> i'm asking you what you mean. in other words, if there are decisions -- it's up to president bachmann or congresswoman bachmann as to whether the independent judge has made a decision that you think is wrong? >> well, again, judges make their decisions, and then it's up to the legislatures, if they want to overturn what that judge states, that's up to them to overturn that decision. >> but that's the case now. so why are we talking about it? >> that's what i am talking about. taking advantage of the power that they have and utilizing it. >> let me ask you quickly about foreign policy. you had a back and forth with congressman paul about the threat that is posed by iran. what do you think is the best way to deal with that emerging

threat? and you don't believe that the united states can be in the lead in attacking iran to prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon, do you? >> we have a very serious problem on our hands. i sit on the intelligence committee in the house of representatives. we have a very serious problem. we have the iaea report, which i have with me, it was released in early november. and this tells the world, from the international atomic energy agency, that there is a very real threat and a likelihood that iran could very soon gain a nuclear weapon. >> but my question -- >> that's something that the world needs to grapple with. >> what would you do, what would president bachmann do to deter that threat? you don't believe the united states should lead an attack, do you? >> i would have every alternative, and option on the table, because iran must never have a nuclear weapon, because they have stated unequivocally, once they gain a nuclear weapon, they will use that weapon to wipe israel off of the map, and they will use it against the

united states. as recently as august, and september of this year the president of iran again declared that sentiment. and if there's anything that history has taught us in the last 100 years, it is this, when a mad man speaks, we should listen. and i take this threat very seriously, because more than anything, i believe in the safety and security of the american people. >> just to be clear, in 2008, you told your hometown paper, when this threat was still very present, that the united states cannot lead this effort because we have too much work to do in iraq, and afghanistan. has your view changed? >> well, i don't know what you're referring to. but this is my opinion, is that we need to stand for our own safety, and our own security, and if you -- if we have a nation that is intending to use a nuclear weapon against us, or against our ally israel, this will change the course of history forever. this must never happen. we need to look this threat in the eye, and the problem with ron paul is that his statements were very dangerous.

he was denying the international atomic energy report, first that it existed, second, that it meant anything. and this is something that's very real, very serious, and we need to take that on. the next president of the united states needs to appreciate this threat, and needs to know exactly what to do to address this threat. >> all right, congresswoman, we'll leave it there. thank you very much, as always. >> thank you, david. and coming up, mitt romney scores an endorsement from south carolina's governor nikki haley. she joins us up next, live, to explain her decision. plus, will haley's endorsement help romney boost his prospects in a state where he's trailing gingrich by double digits, or is it just raising expectations? mike murphy thinks it is. he joins me along with "washington post" columnist e.j. dionne. we'll also talk about the major i have astigmatism. my old contacts would sometimes move and blur my vision. then my eye doctor told me about acuvue® oasys for astigmatism. he said it's the only lens of its kind designed to realign naturally with every blink so now, i'm seeing more clearly.

[ male announcer ] learn more at acuvue.com.

joining me now, the republican governor of south carolina, nikki haley. welcome to "meet the press," governor. >> good morning, david. it's great to be with you. >> thank you so much. we have talked about your endorsement this week of mitt romney. you've endorsed him for the presidency, which he was certainly -- he welcomed warmly. and when you spoke about it on fox news, you said the following -- >> you put all these candidates together, and you've got one perfect candidate. but you're never going to have a perfect candidate. >> why go out of your way to point that out when it comes to mitt romney? >> no, it's not that i was pointing that out in terms of mitt romney. i think it's pointing it out to all the candidates. as you go through this process and we hear from day to day what one says and one does, it's reminding the public that, look, there is no perfect candidate. but whate do need to do say what are the issues of the day?

and what i know the issues of the day in south carolina, and as we hear across the country is jobs, the economy, and spending. so that's where we need to keep our focus. >> the question about whether he's a perfect candidate comes down to who's the most conservative candidate. and as you know, that's a real area of concern in your state, and among conservatives generally when it comes to mitt romney. this is how it looks in south carolina right now. it's the former speaker gingrich at 41% to romney's 21%. you said romney is a different candidate than he was in 2008, when conservatives were particularly unhappy with him. how so? >> well, you know what i noticed, in 2008 he was very much a candidate that was focused on winning. he knew his issues. in 2011, i'm looking at a leader. this is a man who knows how he's going to lead in the first 30 days. he knowles what he wants to accomplish in the first six months. it's no longer about talking points with him. he's had four years to really think about what has gone wrong and what needs to go right. let's be clear, this is not just about picking a conservative candidate. this is about looking at washington, seeing that it is in

complete chaos. saying we can't have anybody associated with washington, because we need someone to go in there and fix the problems. what i know about mitt romney is, he's taken broken businesses and he's fixed them. he took a failing olympics and he made it a successful source of pride for our country. and he went in as a governor of a state, balanced his budget, cut taxes 19 times, and he did it with an 85% democrat legislature. that says a lot. and that's a lot what washington needs right now. >> governor, you were critical of former speaker gingrich after his appearance this may on "meet the press," when he criticized paul ryan's medicare reform plan. what,o you, is disqualifying about speaker gingrich as the nominee of the party? >> you know, it's not -- i'm not going to put someone down to make mitt romney look better. what i will tell you is all the candidacies have good, positive attributes. what was a big factor for me was i didn't want anybody associated with washington. and i wanted someone that knew what it was like to make real decisions. not just to vote, but actually

make decisions. because, as a former legislator, i knew see as governor, it's very different when you make a vote versus actually making decisions. >> you look at the polling there, and i've talked to republicans around the country who say, you know, winning the primary in south carolina, one advantage a candidate can have is you're from the south. do you think rick perry will be a formidable obstacle to mitt romney winning south carolina? >> you know, i think south carolina, what we saw over this past weekend was people were on fire. they were excited about mitt romney. they loved what he had to say. we had packed rooms, overflowing crowds, and so, you know, every candidate's out there trying to connect with the people of south carolina. and what i can tell you is the people of south carolina are very smart, very educated on their issues. they vet their kants very well. and i know at the end of the day they're going to go with who they feel is right. i strongly believe that when they hear what mitt romney has done, not what he's going to do but what he's done, and then his vision for the country, i think you're going to see mitt romney do very well in south carolina.

>> you have tea party backing which is one of the reasons that romney was so please to get your endorsement, hoping to get some of that backing as well in south carolina. as we look at your own approval rate in the state, it is rather low. almost 35% lower ratings, in fact, than president obama in south carolina. and there's been something of a revolt against you among tea partiers who feel that this is a betrayal of that support from the tea party by endorsing romney. >> well, first of all, i'll tell you you're referring to a local poll that also said that president obama was going to win south carolina. and i think everybody knows this is one of the reddest 6 the red states. and in a time where he's showing he's falling in swing states, i just don't believe that to be accurate. having said that, polls are polls. and you know, we never govern on polls. we never put a lot of weight on polls. if you look at the party, what i can tell you is there's no such thing as a tea party candidate. you can get support from the tea party. i have great respect for the tea party. and what they care about is they care about their freedoms, they

care about their liberties, they care about the tenth amendment, and they care about government understanding and elected officials understanding you work for the people, not the other way around. and they want someone that understands the value of a dollar. so you will see they won't vote in a bloc, they will very much make their own decisions up. because tea party members are republicans, democrats, and independents, who want elected officials to remember exactly who it is that they work for. >> you're endorsing mitt romney. is he the odds-on favorite to be the nominee, in your view? >> absolutely. you know, and the reason is, you have to look at the times of the day. the number one issue is job spending and the economy. we are looking at a broken washington. we need someone to go in there and fix it. this man has continued to fix everything he's ever touched. whether it was the private sector. whether it was volunteering in the olympics. whether it was going and taking a liberal state like massachusetts. he was successful every time. and now is a time where we have to say, what do we care about? we care about jobs. we need someone that

understands, if you give a person a job you take care of a family. we've got a lot of families in this country we've got to take care of. >> quickly, governor, mitt romney has been supporti of your election efforts. would you serve as a running mate if you were asked? >> absolutely not. i am very thrilled to be the governor of the state of south carolina. i made a promise to the people of this state and i intend on keeping it. >> so if you were asked you would not serve on the ticket? >> no, i would not. >> all right. governor, we'll leave it there. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> all right. let's turn now to columnist for "the washington post," e.j. dionne as well as republican strategist and columnist for "time" magazine, mike murphy. welcome to you both. whew, big exhale. that was a lot to discuss and a lot to chew on. mike murphy the major moment of the week still is about gingrich versus romney. and that tete-a-tete still a two-person race? >> very much so. with some ron paul support in iowa. you know, we're finally, thank goodness, getting away from all the polls, the barney poll, this poll, that poll. people are actually going to vote pretty soon. or at least in iowa they're

going to caucus. all we really know now because it's very turbulent. these votes can swing. in a republican primary in the last two weeks a lot can happen, we know people showing up with real strength are gingrich, which is a surprise. i didn't see that one coming. you've got to give newt a little credit. romney, who has always been kind of the establishment, there first or second guy almost in every poll, and this ron paul surge which i think has a ceiling on it. but it is in iowa. >> romney versus gingrich this week on the debate stage it was hands off. romney did not go after gingrich because the feeling was in the romney camp he's a pretty good counterpuncher. but if you're watching television in iowa you see romney's superpac, the outside groups, putting up an ad like this. >> newt happens has a done of baggage. he was fined $300,000 and took $1.6 million from freddie mac before it helped cause the economic meltdown. going for the jugular. >> newt is coming under an avalanche of negative advertising in iowa. ron paul has very, very tough advertisg on the air. i think what you're seeing here

is, if you will, the revenge of the base in the republican party. that they have -- their votes have been used. republicans have used incendiary gingrich-style rhetoric to win elections. but now that the real guy is there, the establishment is saying no. and, there are two weeks to iowa. they have a lot of time to blackball newt gingrich, and knock him out. and so, the question is, did this peak in a way that helps or hurts romney? you can argue that if gingrich falls, paul gets a big vote, bachmann gets some vote, romney actually has a chance of winning in iowa. but there is this, i just don't think in the base, there is this pushback against the establishment, and if they go after newt really hard, there will be a swingback to him, among some of the most conservative republicans. >> you saw in terms of defining moments of the week, this debate about the freddie mac money that gingrich received. romney said, well, he ought to give that back. newt gingrich had a rejoinder

and this was it. >> i would just say, that if governor romney would like to give back all the money he's earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees, over his years, that i would be glad to then listen to him. >> wow. i mean a lot of people thought president obama couldn't have made the point any better. real assault on capitalism. wonder what a lot of republicans thought. >> that's the problem. you generally don't go with the marxist line in republican primaries. i think newt's already started to backtrack off that. one caution i'd put is, you know, the horse race stuff that we all enjoy so immediate, this is a delegate contest. it could go a long, long time. the real question is going to be the whole month of january. what happens in florida, which is critical. iowa, critical. new hampshire, critical. and south carolina is a facr. so we're going to start the actual voting. that's a longer process in the daily ups and downs. >> when we talk about iowa, e.j., a republican i spoke to this week said, look, if michele bachmann, if ron paul, even rick perry, can make some mark in iowa, it could make that

gingrich victory seem smaller. and after all, you're talking about a small percentage of delegates that are abortioned off the first four contests. >> you know, it's so bizarre the way presidential politics and punditry works. if somebody had said a month ago, well, newt gingrich won't win a big enough victory at iowa, people would say, you're crazy. and then, if newt gingrich emerges winning iowa at all, he has already proven something. and he comes in to new hampshire, i think -- i think, pretty strong. and then the question is, does this same logic go back and hurt romney? romney was ahead of gingrich by 30 points. >> i think what's really changed in the last 20 days, and this change counts because we're close to an actual election is romney's sky-high expectations are now down. new hampshire can break romney if he didn't win, i believe. but now a smaller romney win means a lot more than it did three or four weeks ago. so this expectations calculator has been reset by the gingrich surge. >> we have a real sense, this is the question i asked speaker boehner and he sort of answered it, i guess, what's going on in

the republican party? can we really say, in our poll this was so interesting, we'll put it up on the screen, 70% of republicans call themselves conservatives. 57% of republicans believe girich is one of them but only 29% of republicans believe romney is one of them. the conservative wing of the republican party is a lot more volatile this year. >> it is. it's energized. they see romney, to some extent as a northeastern republican which is a bad thing in conservative pockets. and newt is doing what i call the old nixon '68 trick, he's really not -- he's been both places in his career. he's been a moderate, more conservative. but his tone is appealing to conservatives. newt is selling a ticket to a debate in october. where he's implying he'll stand up and do what the hearts of a lot of angry republican primary voters want, which is turn to president obama, you socialist, chew him out, out-debate him and that's emotionally attractive to the party. whether that will stick is a big, open question. >> e.j. isn't it amazing? you've been covering newt gingrich for a long time. the speaker of the house john

boehner, who is in leadership with him, as well as all the rest, ankly, nobody stepped up and said, know him the best, he could be president. the feeling, in fact, what they say privately is he doesn't have the leadership skills, nor does he have the temperament, to be president. that's what they say privately. >> and it's even -- it's quite astonishing the things you hear off the record from republicans about newt gingrich. but again, what strikes me is that a lot of these same traits that they are now deriding, when it looks like glitch might tank them against barack obama were traits when liberals pointed them out in 1994 and 1995 they said no, no, no you're missing the whole story. he is visionary. he has self-confidence. now, self-confidence is dubious. >> let me take a quick break. i want to talk about th president. how he stacks up in all of this as we keep our eyes, as well. we'll be back, as well, with our trends and takeaways. a look at what was

i want to get back to our top story. the drama in washington over the payroll tax cut extension. this is still a pitched battle between congressional republicans and the white house. the speaker of the house john boehner on the program this morning said the following -- >> it's pretty clear that i, and our members, oppose the senate bill. it's only for two months. you know, the president said we shouldn't go on vacation until we get our work done. and, frankly, house republicans agree. i believe that two months is just kicking the can down the road.

>> so, e.j., what's going to happen here? and that was significant that he said this morning that he disagrees with what the senate did. it looked like that was moving toward conclusion. >> i think it was a very shrewd way for john boehner to try to deflect the fact that house republicans might allow the payroll tax to increase on january 1st. and he doesn't want that impression out there. and i still thk, in the end, it's going to be very hard for republicans to sit there and say, yes, we'll let this tax increase go through, because it's not over a long enough period and we don't like the provision on the keystone oil pipeline. >> right. how is this resonating, do you think? >> all i do is keep looking at these polls showing 8% approval rating. i saw one at 6%. >> to be fair, it's 9%. >> i saw 6%. >> lower than the low. >> then you're in trouble. i'll give you that. >> lower than the margin of error which means it's statistically impossible to find anybody in the united states who approves of congress. so how bad can it get? >> more broadly, this is also a

question about the president. and he's defending his work on the economy. he did keep the campaign promise on iraq, with the final troops coming out today. what does he face and how does he stack up as this campaign rolls out? >> well, it's like a balance sheet. on one hand the country wants to fire him as president. his polls are lousy. mostly because of the economy. he's the top guy, buck stops somewhere. he's been ineffective on the economy. joblessness, they want to fire him. on the other side of the equation, what are the republicans going to do, because ultimately it's a race against somebody, i think a lot of republican professionals are worried about newt as naacp nominee for that reason. i've period people ta about even losing the house, so that'sen issue. and second the boom ma campaign has a lot of money and a chicago attitude. so i think it's going to be a very aggressive campaign for them and very negative. i think it's a fair fight. could go either way. >> i thought it was interesting as well with speaker boehner, if you look at the joblessnumbers in ohio, and they're coming down, sorry, the jobless rate is coming down, the question in this campaign is going to be about who gets credit for any improvements in the economy.

is it going to be tougher for republicans to make the case against this president if there's a trend line moving in his favor? >> well, i think for the very reasons mike said, if there is improvement in the economy, it's going to help barack obama just as if there's a downturn, again, it's going to hurt barack obama. but i think two things have happened to help him. one is, he looks a whole lot stronger today than he did in august, when the whole fight over the debt ceiling made him look weak. he started making an argument, and he's made it quite consistently, with a kind of discipline that he hadn't had before. he doesn't like to repeat the same speech. he stayed on it. and then you have this republican primary, and whatever comes out of this, i think the image of the republican party has been weakened by the nature of this fight, and the problems of herman cain and the problems of rick perry. i think it's not a permanent thing, but it un >> let me look quickly at our "trend tracker," the top political stories that are trending this morning. the romney endorsement big, the

iraq war ending, which we've covered through the hour, and the tax cut that will play out early today and through the early part of the week. thank you both, as always, and happy holidays. >> you, too. >> before we go, be sure to watch our "press pass" conversation on our blog. this week, the intersection between the politics and the art. i spoke with holland taylor, a actress who started major roles on the big and small screen, "two and a half men," one of my personal favorites i have to point out, "bosom buddies," but is now starring as the late governor of texas. you can see that on our blog. we'll be back on christmas morning with a special discussion about the state of the country and a look ahead to politics in the new year. tom brokaw, tom friedman, marc morial and kathleen parker. that's next sunday. until then, have a happy holiday week. if it's sunday, it's "meet the press."