Detailed Instructions: In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Q: For every Southern boy 14 years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it’s still not yet two o’clock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets and his hat in one hand probably and his sword in the other looking up the hill waiting for Longstreet to give the word and it’s all in the balance, it hasn’t happened yet, it hasn’t even begun yet, it not only hasn’t begun yet but there is still time for it not to begin against that position and those circumstances which made more men than Garnett and Kemper and Armstead and Wilcox look grave yet it’s going to begin, we all know that, we have come too far with too much at stake and that moment doesn’t need even a 14-year-old boy to think This time. Maybe this time with all this much to lose and all this much to gain: Pennsylvania, Maryland, the world, the golden dome of Washington itself to crown with desperate and unbelievable victory the desperate gamble, the cast made two years ago . . . 
  
 For every American conservative, not once but whenever he wants it, it’s always the evening of November 4, 1980, the instant when we knew Ronald Reagan, the man who gave the speech in the lost cause of 1964, leader of the movement since 1966, derided by liberal elites and despised by the Republican establishment, the moment when we knew—he’d won, we’d won, the impossible dream was possible, the desperate gamble of modern conservatism might pay off, conservatism had a chance, America had a chance. And then, a decade later—the Cold War won, the economy revived, America led out of the abyss, we’d come so far with so much at stake—conservatism vindicated, America restored, a desperate and unbelievable victory for the cast made so many years ago against such odds. 
  
 But that was then, and this is now. Now is 2012, and it seems clear that 2012 isn’t going to be another 1980. The reality seems to be that we’re not going to have a chance to replay that election, with (at least in the hazy glow of retrospect) a compelling conservative leader of long standing but ever youthful, a man who stood tall and spoke for us and for America, riding gracefully to victory over the GOP establishment in the primaries and over decadent liberalism in the general election. Assuming the presidential field stays as it is, 2012 won’t be a repeat of 1980. 
  
 Which is not to say that 2012 can’t be a good, even a very good, election for conservatives and for the country. There are other models for victory. In 1992 an incumbent president was soundly defeated by an impressive though flawed candidate who emerged from a weak field, after leading lights in his party refused to run (Cuomo, Bradley, Gore, Gephardt). Bill Clinton doesn’t provide a model of successful governance for the next Republican president—the next president is going to have to lead, not accommodate—but he does suggest another, less elegant model than 1980 for the defeat of an incompetent incumbent. 
  
 And then there’s 1932, when a not particularly distinguished four-year governor who’d zigged and zagged back and forth to be acceptable to large parts of the Democratic party, and whose political career was at first based partly on his last name, defeated another incumbent. Franklin Roosevelt did turn out to be a consequential president—because of the nature of the challenges he faced, because the country was ready for fundamental change, because there was a movement behind him (or ahead of him) that was full of ideas and energy, because there were strong representatives of that movement in Congress and in statehouses, and because he rose to the occasion. 
  
 These other models for conservative success in 2012 need to be studied for their lessons and adapted to our times. Reversing Obama’s weakness abroad, repealing Obamacare, restoring solvency and prosperity and limiting government at home, these are tasks too important not to be achieved because of our nostalgic disappointment that we will not, in 2012, replay a moment that is not to be again—and that perhaps never truly was. 
  
 Still, for every conservative of a certain age, there is the instant when it’s Election Day 1980, and the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out. . . . ||||| The GOP’s 2012 field is dominated thus far by frivolous flops. Matt Latimer on the sorry state of affairs—and why it’s not too late for a newcomer. Plus, Peter Beinart on why conservatives should root for Romney . 
  
 One GOP frontrunner is accused of several instances of sexual harassment; the other has managed to make his candidacy as exciting as coffin shopping. A third leading candidate spent this week trying to convince people he wasn’t drunk during a speech in New Hampshire. Not a single one of them—not Herman Cain nor Mitt Romney nor Rick Perry—bests a badly weakened Barack Obama in the latest polls. And yet our betters in the GOP establishment—the same crew who brought us Bob Dole, John McCain, and the PR strategy for the Iraq War—inform us that Republican primary voters are happier with their choices than ever. 
  
 The view may look bright at the top GOP echelon, but that does not appear to be the attitude of the rank and file. If anything, there is deep unease among activist conservatives—the sort who trudge to the polls in the bitter winters of Iowa and New Hampshire—about the state of the race. At several recent functions in Washington, attendees expressed great enthusiasm for unseating Obama, but hardly anyone was thrilled with their likely standard bearers. 
  
 Is it time for the GOP to start panicking yet? 
  
 Cain’s tortured and contradictory response to sexual-harassment allegations was made even worse by the reckless, not-ready-for-prime-time effort at deflection. Rick Perry was behind this! No, it was Rahm Emanuel! No, it was a massive media conspiracy! No, it was Professor Plum with the lead pipe in the billiards room. That Cain remains floating atop the GOP field is less a tribute to his staying power than a cruel indictment of the remaining field of frivolous flops. When you cannot lure voters away from a man who is accused of several counts of disreputable behavior and who seems to lack an understanding of many basic issues, from the Israeli-Palestinian crisis to his own tax plan, you’ve got yourself a problem. 
  
 As for Romney, he has finally started to outline some specifics to his proposals, most notably courageous plans to reform Medicare and Social Security. But even this effort posed an interesting problem for him. If another candidate had talked freely about raising the retirement age for Medicare and Social Security and turning Medicaid into block grants, there might have been a larger outcry. With Romney, there really wasn’t. Even the media seem to have decided that nothing the risk-averse, milquetoast Romney says really has anything to do with his presidency. All his ideas feel like consultant-fed pablum free to be ignored the minute the polls turn. When 72 percent of Romney’s own voters say they could easily change their vote to someone else, you’ve got a problem. 
  
 At several recent functions in Washington, attendees expressed great enthusiasm for unseating Obama, but hardly anyone was thrilled with their likely standard bearers. 
  
 Which means the GOP nominating process may yet take some surprising turns. Overall, about half of Republicans surveyed in a recent Washington Post–ABC News poll said they may yet change their allegiance in the race. That feels about right. In fact, the number may even grow higher as voters continue to shop for the least unacceptable of the lot. 
  
 Of the main contenders, only Perry and Newt Gingrich have demonstrated any signs of resurgence. Since the GOP debates commenced, Gingrich has steadily crept back into double digits in most polls, based on something surprising: ideas. He has little money, he has few ground troops, he has unleashed no attack ads, but he has answered questions clearly, forthrightly, and knowledgeably. And it is not inconceivable that others—even a Bachmann or a Santorum or a Huntsman—may finally find their day in the sun. 
  
 This year feels very different, as if anything could happen. Who knows: if an establishment favorite like Romney falters early, it is always possible that an entirely new candidate might yet decide to jump into the contest. Hoover, FDR, Kennedy, Nixon, and LBJ each won presidential primaries as write-in candidates. If things continue to be so unsettled, it’s not impossible that someone may decide to repeat that feat in 2012. Just don’t anybody give that idea to Donald Trump. 
  
  |||||
A:
On the surface, things aren’t looking good for President Obama—but if Republicans want to beat him, they’ll need a viable candidate. And that’s something they don’t appear to have, writes Matt Latimer for the Daily Beast. Instead, they’ve got battered Herman Cain, who’s still at the top of the field. “When you cannot lure voters away from a man who is accused of several counts of disreputable behavior and who seems to lack an understanding of many basic issues, you’ve got yourself a problem,” Latimer writes. Mitt Romney, meanwhile, seems so full of “consultant-fed pablum” that even his controversial ideas—like raising the retirement age—don’t get the media going. Then there’s Rick Perry, who’s still trying to prove he wasn’t plastered in New Hampshire. Even William Kristol is acknowledging that no Republican is going to come from nowhere and pull a 1980 Ronald Reagan-style victory. “Is it time for the GOP to start panicking yet?” Latimer asks. Yep. And it's not too late for a new candidate to jump in. "Just don't anybody give that idea to Donald Trump."