Charley, you are playing games. You know full well what MSM stands for, because you 'asked' me the same question in another thread recently.

Nader didn't run for president in 1968. He allowed his name to be used as a write-in 'none of the above' candidacy in 1992. He was drafted by the Greens in 1996, and he was on the ballot in places where the Greens petitioned to get him on.

2000 was the first time Ralph Nader actively ran as a presidential candidate trying to get on the ballot in all 50 states.

In 2004, the Democratic National Party actively sought court orders to keep him off the ballot in many states. The MSM refused to let him participate in debates, even though he met most of the tests that had put forth when they allowed Ross Perot to participate in debates in 1992's Bush v Clinton race.

The deck is completely stacked against Nader gaining any ground by getting his message out to voters--especially by plutocrat surrogates of the MSM, who will likely also refuse to run his ads (as they did in 2004 to him and to the anti-war movements ads) as well as keep him off the debates, and by the Democratic National Party's court challenges to him on the state ballots to keep voters from even having the chance to vote for him.

But I'm going to work for him anyway, because I believe Nader's candidacy is our last best hope for saving the country from dictatorship.

The laws are all in place now for any president to declare martial law, and start filling up prisons with dissenters. Voting for Obama or Clinton won't stop that from happening. It might not even delay it.