presidential race moved into new hampshire today and became a ground war. newt gingrich arrived this morning, a fourth-place finnish iowa, opened fire on the iowa winner, mitt romney. >> i find it amazing the news media continues to say he's the most electable republican when he can't even break out in his own party. i don't think -- he'll do fairly well here. this one of his three best states. but the fact is that governor romney, in the end, has a limited appeal in a conservative party. >> instead of striking back at gingrich, romney arrived in new hampshire celebrated the endorsement of senator john mccain and together they concentrated fire on president obama. >> my friends, our message, our message to president barack obama is, you can run but you can't hide from your record. >> he said if i can't turn this economy around in three years i'll be looking at a one-term proposition. i'm here to collect. we're going to take back the white house. >> romney may sound like he's looking beyond new hampshire and past his republican opponents. but his republican opponents are looking at mitt romney. jim acosta joins us tonight. jim, a narrow, eight-vote victory in the state of iowa, mitt romney obviously know his needs a bigger victory in new hampshire. how big do they think to make clear, i'm the prohibitive front-runner? >> reporter: absolutely, john. mitt romney needs new hampshire to be a blowout after what happened in iowa. that slim eight-point -- excuse me, eight-vote margin of victory for the former massachusetts governor is not what anybody had in mind, least of all him. it was once thought if he had run the table and had one iowa and come into new hampshire and won this state, that would make him sort of an unstoppable force for the gop nomination. that didn't happen and that might explain why we're seeing john mccain out on the campaign trail with mitt romney. sort of reset the campaign, reset the tone of what's happening here in new hampshire to remind folks that mitt romney has on his team the man who resurrected his political career four years ago, coming into the state, holding town halls like where we are standing now here in peterboro and launching his campaign on to the gop nomination and then on to not winning the presidency, but, you know, keeping his campaign going when it was looking very grim for john mccain four years ago. and you know, mitt romney has his hands full up here in new hampshire, john. you mentioned rick santorum. he's here tonight. newt gingrich was here earlier today. he has a -- there's a pro-gingrich super pac that has an ad out essentially a recycled ad from john mccain's campaign in '08, tearing into mitt romney, calling him a flip-flopper. mitt romney has his hands full. it does not hurt to have john mccain on his side. they'll be out here in a few moments. >> you can see jim acosta, the energy has moved from iowa to new hampshire as well. live at a mitt romney event in new hampshire. jim mentioned rick santorum. he lost by eight votes in eye but declare that a huge, moral victory for a candidate who had little money, written off in the polls for months, as a long shot who wouldn't last past iowa. rick santorum, from the strong performance in iowa joins us manchest manchester, new hampshire. good to see you. first, congratulations. welcome to the fray in new hampshire. >> thank you very much. it's great to be here. in fact, back here. this is trip number 31 for me to new hampshire. i've done over 100 town hall meetings here. we're excited to get back on the ground here and surprise a few people, just like we did last time around. >> well, let's go through that. you now emerge, you are at least for this week, the conservative alternative,ed leading conservative al teternative to t romney. when you were way down in the polls, you started to surge in iowa, you say you can make the case you are the most consistent conservative in this race. i want you to listen here. texas rick perry will see you in south carolina, disagrees. >> rick's going to have a problem when he leaves and people start vetting his background from a fiscal conservative standpoint. this guy's the king of earmarks and pork barrel spend, liaison between washington and k street. he's got real bags that he's going to have 0 explain to people and that's a problem for him. >> let's go through that, senator. with the rising in the polls, it's going to come some tougher scrutiny. ear mashes, you say they're a good thing in the senate. you stand by that, a good thing? >> well, all i said is that what the constitution provides is that congress appropriate funds and that's what we do. we appropriate funds. and as ron paul did, as jim demint did, just about every single member of congress did, when you go to congress, you make sure that when taxes go from your state to washington, d.c., you fight to make sure you get your fair share back. >> it's not quite every -- forgive me for interrupting, it's not every single senator. john mccain, he's long opposed earmarks, a lot of people were looking for help in that fight. >> john mccain it. >> the vice president of taxpayers for common sense say in pennsylvania di $483 million >> what i would say about john mccain, the reason john mccain made earmarks a big deal he wasn't for entitlement reform. that's where the big money is. i've come out and said i'm going to cut $5 trillion over the next five years. you won't have room for earmarks. what we need to do is to do reform of social security and medicare and medicaid and food stamps and housing programs and ssi. i was the author of the welfare reform act. that was serious dollars. earmarks are something that's focused in by people who simply aren't willing to take on the tough problems. i took on the tough problems. and i also said that when earmarks got abusive, we should end them. i agree with that. but the idea that earmarks are the problem in washington, d.c. is ridiculous. the problem are the entitlement programs and this desire to spend more money and that's what i've taken on in my career. i've been for the balanced budget aemth of the constitution. it's one of the major plugs of my campaign. you'll see someone as tough on spending as anybody. >> as you make that case in new hampshire, you know, you run into tea party people who disagree with you on earmarks. you mentioned entitlements. we've had this conversation in the past. you voted for the medicare prescription drug benefit. you say essentially you're holding your nose, you didn't lead the charge for that legislation but when it came to the floor you decided it was worth voting for. listen, your own voice last june, you sound more optimist ex-about the program. >> did anybody ever look at medicare prescription drug plan? the medicare prescription drug plan is exactly the model paul ryan is asking. we, quote, shoved that down the throats of the american public. no, we didn't, we gave them a choice. seniors loved the medicare prescription plan and that's what we are proposing for medicare, give people resources to go out and choose for themselves as what's best for themselves. >> again, a lot of tea party voters and this may come up in the new debates as well, think that medicare prescription drugs was a disaster, washington expanding its reach. a good vote? >> well, what i said was, at that town hall meeting, and what i'll say again is the same thing, that the model we used was a private sector model. one of the reasons i held my nose and voted for it we did have a private sector model for medicare prescription drugs which was in fact a model that paul ryan used. we also had a medicare advantage program which took the one size fits all medicare program in the same way that ryan is trying to do and give people an option for the private sector and finally we had a provision in there for health saved accounts something for that i have been fighting for 15 years. the model we used for the medicare prescription drug, which i was not for a universal benefit, once expansive, but once settled upon i said let's see if we can make this as good a program as we can to save money. well, we did. medicare prescription drug program has come in 40% under budget. i was not for and did not advocate for the comprehensive benefit, nor did advocate for it not being paid for, a lot of things in the bill set the template for reform which would save far more money than the expn expapgs of the benefit. those are the things when you're a congressman you have to make those kind of checks, make those kind of decisions that sometimes, as i said in this case was 51/49. as president you can make tougher decisions, veto bills when they're not what you want and those are the kind of things i would do. if you look at what i accomplished, as a lot of conservatives accomplished who voted that, set a template for a major change in medicare which if it wasn't for president obama would beismented. >> you're trying to be the chief executive now and it's an important distinction. in the comment we heard you were praising the paul ryan program. it's a voucher program seniors would get so much money from the government to buy health care. if the cost of the health care then in years down the road exceed the voucher they would have to make up the difference on their own. would a president santorum be comfortable with that? >> yeah, that's exactly how the medicare prescription drug plan works john. it works that way right now. we make that available to seniors. it's similar to what paul ryan's proposing, as you know, ron wyden signed on to. the voucher does go up. the voucher does go up, based on the competitive increases driven by competition in the insurance plans which is exactly what you want. you want the private sector competing, driving down costs, improving efficiency, get rid of cme where government micromanages health care through medicare, medicaid. that's the advantage of a ryan plan. we have right now in essence either a government-run or a government-regulated private sector insurance system. what we need is a deregulated, not unregulated, but deregulated, private sector insurance plans to reduce cost. >> and if some seniors have to dig into their pockets to pay for it, that's okay? >> well, seniors dig into their pocket right now to pay for medicare. they pay for their medicare part b subsidy. almost every senior has a mehdi grap policy. why? the policy doesn't cover things they want so they have to buy additional coverage. instead of buying your medigap policy you buy a policy that has choices to take the kind of policies and the kind of choices as to the providers who you're going to use, when you want a limited set of providers and more benefits, a broader set of providers and fewer benefits, all of those things are choicers for seniors that they don't have to apply the money to. if they don't have what they want, they have to buy medigap insurance which is out of their pocket now. >> a lot of democrats were celebrating if you will, senator santorum, last night saying in their view you're on the extreme right on many social issues and they think for them it's a good thing that these issues will be front and center. one of the remarks you have made in the past, you know this, comes up from time to time, you were talking about same-sex marriage, talking about a texas case making its way through the courts, sodomy laws back in early 2003. you said this to the associated press, every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. why? because society is based on one thing, that society is based on future of the society and that's, what, children. monogamist relationships in every society the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. that's not to pick on homosexually, it's not, you know. man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be, it is one thing. there are a lot of people saying, whoa, how do you connect that, homosexual behavior to bestiality? you went on to talk about bigamy. how do you connect the dots? >> hold on one second. read the quote. i said it's not. it is not. i didn't say it is. i said it's not. i'm trying to understand what you're trying to make the point on i said it's not those things. i didn't connect them. i specifically excluded them. >> you specifically exclude them. you have said that you have no problem with homosexuality. >> i said it's not. >> you have a problem with homosexual act. if a man loves a man or a woman loves a woman, you're fine with that as long as what? >> well, my -- as you know, my catholic faith teaches that it's actions that are the problems, not necessarily someone's feelings and that's -- i was reflecting catholic teaching on the subject. i think christian teaching on the subject that one can have desires to do things which we believe are wrong but it's when you act out those things that is a problem. and i was simply reflecting that opinion and that belief structure that i happen to hold as a catholic. >> and as a president, should you reflect that in the case you have said that contraception is dangerous? >> yeah, i think both in the case of the texas case, which was the sodomy case, as well as the contraceptive case what i've said is both of those laws, i would not have voted for. i don't believe that everything that is immoral should be illegal. the government doesn't have a role to play in everything that either people of faith or no faith think are wrong or immoral. that was one. and i said it at the time that i wouldn't have voted for the texas sodomy law in place, nor would i vote to ban contraception, though i think that, as a catholic, who the catholic church teaches that contraception is wrong, i would not do it myself. >> and, help me understand this. as a member of the house and the senate you're voting and your constituents reflect on this, is your president the president of the nation. how would you be different as a president than as a senator on the issues if at all? >> again, i didn't vote for any kind of ban on contraception nor did i vote for any ban on sodomies nor would i as president, if that's the question you're asking. what i said was that, in this whole case, that i thought the supreme court was wrong in making a constitutional right. and that's the discussion. it wasn't about my belief on the underlying law, which i said i wouldn't have supported. >> mark moral, president of the national urban league said something the other day. he was talking about a comment you made at a rally in iowa this past sunday and told an audience that you don't want to, quote, make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money. mark said, senator santorum is per pett waiting a false and racial stereotype in an a dispraetdi desperate attempt to score political points. quite frankly, should be ashamed of yourself. how would you respond to that, senator? >> first off, mark and i have worked together on a number of issues and he knows quite well how much work i've done in the friend american community. i've worked with him at the urban league, when he was mayor of new orleans. the or thing is, i've looks that the quote. eye looks at the video. in fact, i'm confident i didn't say black. i started to say a word and sort of mumbled and changed my thought. i don't recall saying black. no one in that audience, no one listening new york reporter there, heard me say that. i think it was, from everything i see and i've looked at it several times, i was starting to say one word and i sort of came up and with a different word and moved on and it sounded like black. but i can assure you, if you look at my record, there's no one that's worked more when is and a senator from pennsylvania in the urban communities, both black, hispanics, as well as whites. no one worked more with african-americans, whether historically black colleges. i set up a program to help historically black colleges be able to get better access to educational funds in the congress. in fact, had a summit every year for historically black colleges, not just in pennsylvania, which we have three, but also all across this country. so i will match my record against any democrat or republican in working in african-american communities. and i would specifically point to the city of chester, which is an overwhelmingly african-american community. and we were able to work with them and bring almost $1 billion worth of investment into that community by helping them bring private sector resources and private sector jobs with some minor transportation improvements to improve access off i-95, to increase that. so match my record up. go look at it. and then look at what was probably a continuing-tied moment as opposed to something that was deliberate. and i think mark morial knows better of me than to make those statements. >> questions about the moment. you were nowhere in the polls a few weeks ago. now you dom new hampshire having essentially tied mitt romney. you have a big challenge in new hampshire this week. when we talked to iowa several s back, you were 4%, you said your wife was getting frustrated from time to time you're out there day after day away from the family and saying, rick, 4% in the polls. we've got to see her on stage with you last night, showing a big hug to our viewers. assess this moment. the country's looking at you and looking at your family in some ways for the first time because you're at the top of the race right now. how important is she in terms of your political career, advice and the like? >> i said, if you play back my introduction, which i won't repeat because i get emotional when i think about how much my wife has sacrificed during this time, but frankly through the 16 years of being in the house and the senate and the enormous amount of time and effort i put into that work and trying to serve the people of pennsylvania, she's made a tremendous sacrifice and she's done so because she shares the same vision i have. this is something that we prayed a lot about before we decided to make this decision. frankly, the easier course would have been to stay home and to continue to work and do the things to provide my -- for my family and spend more time with her. we both felt this was something that our country needed someone to step forward who had a little different perspective on what this country needs than other republican candidates in the race. it was a gratifying moment that the people of iowa recognized that. an affirmation to the sacrifice she's make, not just her, but all of my children making, it was worth while and we've been able to make a statement and talk about issues, about people getting jobs, particularly everybody, blue collar workers, from where karen and i grew up in southwestern pennsylvania left behind by this economy, we feel very good that we're talking about them, we're talking about life, we're talking about family, talking about being strong overseas, with an america that ycan be respected. those are things important to her and me, too. >> you got back to the hotel, did you say, honey, i told you so? >> no. actually, i'll admit, we watched cnn till you guys -- i was listening to the little package you had before jeanne moos package and i was reliving it. i was watching that late at night and enjoying the coverage. we were just sitting there watching it and she fell asleep watching it and that was sort of the end of our evening. >> smart lady. senator rick santorum, a lot of questions in the week ahead. a big week for you in the next week in new hampshire. we'll talk more in the days ahead. appreciate it. >> thanks so much, john. >> thank you, senator. we'll take a quick break. we'll be back. more of our coverage, texas governor rick perry was going to go home to texas to reconsider his presidential bid but didn't take