Mickey thinks so (scroll down past the post about the administration's "virtual fence" fiasco):
If Hillary wins Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania, that's what she's going to claim. It's not a bogus argument. Voters in late primaries have more information than voters in early primaries. Superdelegates should be able to take note. That's different from arguing that Hillary should be able to pull strings and get superdelegates even if she keeps losing.
I agree.
I think that there are some similarities between presidential primaries and the mythical national college football championship (particularly this year, when perceived front-runners kept losing each week). A loss early in the season is nowhere near as damaging as a late one, in terms of the polls. Given how arcane the primary system is, with different rules for every state, it does make sense that a later primary should count more than an early one, which is why Hillary! shouldn't be counted out yet (and won't be, if she has anything to say about it). Barring a disaster for her (huge losses in both Texas and Ohio on Tuesday), I expect her to fight all the way to Denver. And I'll love every minute of it.
Weighing later primaries heavier might also counter the insanity for states to get an early primary to count more. But don't weight too heavily or you get insanity going the other direction. But probably don't want to change the rules mid game to do it this year.