How would these numbers affect March 1 states?

[Funtatlaguy]

Just for funnin around sake, let's say:
Nevada - Bernie 51% Hillary 49%
S.Carolina - Hillary 60% Bernie 40%

Does that change anything radically on March 1, or does the race remain status quo?

[Renew Deal]

1. Hillary winning that big in SC would be a sign of her winning that big in the rest of the south.

And a sign that the race will be effectively over on March 1.

[cali]

2. I disagree. I don't think it would be over at that time.

[Renew Deal]

3. Not over. Just effectively over

Meaning he will not be able to catch up.

[Live and Learn]

4. Seriously, the South will dictate our President?

Is that the same South that Democrats usually lose?

[firebrand80]

6. Same argument from '08

Except Hillary was on the other side of it

[Live and Learn]

10. Hillary is no Obama! Even the coasts liked Obama and still do. Hillary, not so much. nt

[firebrand80]

11. She's not, I'm simply saying

That we might have the same arguments being made in '08, when Hillary was saying that she was stronger in the "big blue states that democrats need to win," and Obama countering that he could expand the map.

It's irrelevant either way, the candidate with the most delegates wins, no matter where they come from.

[Live and Learn]

12. You mean when Dean's 50 state stratefy worked? But then Obama put DWS in charge and...

I wouldn't pin my hopes on the south these days.

[firebrand80]

13. Yes, that's what I mean nt

[Renew Deal]

8. It did in 2008...

[Joe the Revelator]

5. I don't know about that, he has the money and the people to make it to the west...

If he can weather super tuesday and get to the midwest, he will still have a shot.

[firebrand80]

7. He can take it to the convention if he wants to

But at some point, if the math says he needs to win, for example, 75% of the remaining delegates, it's effectively over.

[Live and Learn]

9. A yuuuuge shot! nt