Last week, former New York mayor and multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg indicated that he might run as an independent for the presidency in November.

Whether he has a real chance of winning mostly depends on the two major parties' nominations, but there may be a slim opening.

However, in the event that he did win, it's unlikely Bloomberg would solve the U.S. economy's problems. In fact, he might make them worse…

Bloomberg Knows Best (According to Bloomberg!)

Bloomberg's attraction is obvious at a time when Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are making considerable progress in the polls.

He is anti-populist, offering the opposite of Trump's and Sanders' populist appeal.

Rather than offer solutions that actually appeal to the electorate, Bloomberg has always believed in giving the electorate what's good for it, whether through expensive anti-global warming campaigns, or fatuous bans on 32-ounce soda bottles.

His support base is both bi-coastal and elite. It tilts fairly heavily towards the Democrats, since he has little appeal in the red states or among blue-collar and evangelical voters in the blue states of the Midwest.

A modestly successful Bloomberg third-party campaign – anything up to Ross Perot's 19% of the vote in 1992 – would tilt the election somewhat towards the Republicans, making it easier for them to win states like Pennsylvania, Virginia, and possibly Oregon and Washington, where he would take votes mainly from the Democrats.

To do better than Ross Perot, however, Bloomberg would need to find a major gap in the electorate that his personality and politics might fill. But that depends on the main parties' nominations.

Poring Over Permutations

If they nominate Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, there may be a massive demand for an uncorrupt, sensible figure to safely guide the country for four years.

If they nominate Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders, there will be a huge policy gap, which a more centrist candidate like Bloomberg might fill.