What you've forgotten (or are suppressing) is this.
First, there's the matter of deadlines for getting on the ballots on the primaries. If this goes on I think about 6 more weeks, it's too late for Bloomy to run on the Dem side, and he *has* to go independent.
Second, there's the matter of what this does in states *other than those in New England*.
Bloomy may take NY and NJ (and, for kicks, let's say Massachusetts). Great. But the GOP was never *counting* on them for victory anyway.
But then -- what of all the other states, where the RINOs who normally backstab the GOP by secretly voting Dem in the General, go for Bloomy? At the same time a lot of "security moms" and the chronically-unemployed-under-Obama, have a choice between a gun-grabber, or Communist looney bird Sanders on the one and, and Donald (make American Great Again, close the border, pro 2nd Amendment, not a pro-life fanatic) like Trump? Yep. A large number of Dems who normally sit out, or tepidly vote Dem, go to the GOP.
Net results: Dems lose three big states they normally get. Dems lose several purple states, too.
Trump landslide.
I don't think there has been any discussion of Bloomberg running as a Dem - If he runs it will be as an independent. I never suggested otherwise. In fact, my whole premise was based upon the idea that if Bloomberg was able to win a couple of states as an independent, that could throw the race into the House.
Net results: Dems lose three big states they normally get. Dems lose several purple states, too.
You are assuming that Dems that did not want to vote for Hillary in the purple states would go to Trump. I think that is a dangerous assumption if you have another "Dem-lite" candidate in the race like Bloomberg. Remember that Trump has the highest unfavorables of anyone in the race. Give people a third option, and they may just take it...
This is all just a thought exercise, but if Bloomberg gets in, it could really shake up the race.