So... what about a fourth term for Bloomberg?

Did I just turn off half my readers?!

Sorry, but I couldn't help but contemplate this as I read an excerpt from a recap of the most recent NYC mayoral debate:

Even as it highlighted a new top tier in the field, the evening presented, in stark terms, Mr. Weiner’s fallen stature in a race that he once led. He was ignored by his opponents for much of the debate, and his most memorable moment came after the candidates were asked if they had ever texted while driving. Mr. Weiner, whose smartphone antics have been well documented, acknowledged that, indeed, he had. “Yes,” he said, his cheeks burning red as the audience roared with laughter.

Certainly makes for more entertaining news. But after laughing, I nearly cried. So depressing. This pretty much captures the way I've always felt about politics. I feel unhealthy engaging in them. Watching debates gives me hives. It's impossible to keep track of the un-kept promises. I've experienced many a family dinner ruined by political chatter. And yet so often we can't be sure if the candidate or whomever we are defending is who they say they are, or believes what they say they do. 

A fourth term for Bloomberg is heresy, I realize. The third term was controversial enough. I fully recognize his demeanor and approach can be off-putting, and I believe that many of his critics have sound arguments. But for me, Bloomberg's progress on a platform near and dear to my heart - green and healthy initiatives - would be enough to warrant that fourth term.

Put simply, he wants to reverse the obesity epidemic. This is not something you typically hear as a top priority from a politician. And at face value, it may not seem appropriate for the NYC mayor to be focusing so much of his time here. One of the biggest criticisms against him is that he's messing in areas government shouldn't play in. But make no mistake: this isn't about thinner people walking our streets. Remember, Bloomberg is a businessman first. It's the trickle down ECONOMIC effects of a healthier community - on productivity, on education, on healthcare costs, etc. - that are his motivation. And those economic issues are in-arguably the responsibility of the NYC mayor.

A lot of his initiatives have been successful (smoking ban, calorie listings, bike lanes), others have failed (soda tax being among the biggest); others still may not come to fruition by the time he leaves office ('active design' guidelines laws being the latest.) But the green and healthy resume he's built in his nearly 12 years is undeniable. Even his failures have sparked consumer awareness and debate - absolute requirements for any sort of significant change - that never would have happened without the effort. And it's all paying off.

I've heard chatter from time to time about some of his successful pushes being reversed by the next mayor. I can only hope those get filed under 'un-kept promises', political things said to capture a certain audience's vote rather than something to follow through on. And that instead, the next mayor pushes for the progress to continue, because we can't afford (in the broadest definition of the word) for it not to. 

UPDATE: sort of... thought this was an interesting piece in the NYT noting each of the candidates stances on some of Bloomberg's public health agenda items.