“...even if she wins Ohio and Texas (I doubt it) she would have a minimal delegate gain due to the Dems proportional distribution.”
Delegate count after Ohio and Tx doesn’t matter. It will prove he cannot win the big states and the Clinton’s will have leverage to runoff in Mich/Florida, that will give her the lead. Game over. It gives the SuperDelegates cover to abandon the great black hope.
Sorry but I can't go with that. Hillary had a huge lead and huge infrastructure in place before Obama even threw in his hat. His not "winning" big states means he didn't beat a fellow Democrat in any particular "big state" while ignoring the proportional aspect of the Dem nomination that makes winning a state with a majority vote to have limited value. That does not mean that those that voted in a primary for one candidate would not vote for the other candidate if they go on to the general.
As far as a run-off in Michigan and Florida, not only would it be unprecedented but it would be seen as a play by Clinton to try to catch up on the delegate count in as far as she will not otherwise.
Michigan, where Clinton was the only candidate on the ballot, would be the only one to even be considered to "revote". Florida had both candidates on the ballot and Clinton has used her win in Florida as a asset card and so she has got all the value she deserves out of that win.