Primary Shenanigens

I'm learning stuff about the procedural details of the primary elections. To put it bluntly, they're stupid. Allow me to explain. I live in Michigan. For those that don't know, the Michigan primary was held January 15, well ahead of the February 5 date that both the DNC and RNC recognize (excepting states with "special exemption", such as Iowa and New Hampshire). So, what does this mean? In order to understand the ramifications, one must understands how the primary system works. First off, the Democrats and the Republicans systems are different (Why, exactly?). For the Dems, there are 4049 potential "delegate" votes. 3253 of these votes (80%) are considered "pledged', where the delegate must vote for the candidate that their particular state chose. The remaining 20% are "unpledged", and can vote for whoever they wish, regardless of the election. In the end, the candidate who secures the majority of the 4049 votes is the Democratic candidate. The Democrats also have all sorts of other rules regarding the election process. In Michigan specifically, due to the fact that the Michigan primary was held before the approved February 5 date, all of the Michigan delegate votes have been stripped (where they have gone is something I have not been able to ascertain). The final analysis - if you live in Michigan and voted Democrat in the primary - sorry, your vote doesn't count. a decent Democratic voting timeline is here. The Republican situation is somewhat different. In their case, only 2345 delegates are available. It appears that some of the state caucuses are "non-binding", which I assume is similar to the Democrat's "unpledged", except that it is done by state, instead of by percentage. The effect of this difference is unclear to me at this point, but I will continue to do some more research. In the Michigan situation again, due to the advancement in primary date, the Republicans have chosen to strip Michigan of half it's delegates. Is this a random number? Other states - such as South Carolina - have received the same restriction, but states with non-binding caucuses (Nevada) were not restricted by the Republicans. A similar schedule to the Dem one above is here. How very odd... The only logical reason I can see for the various restrictions has to do with campaign strategy. These restrictions would help the candidates spend their money properly (in Iowa and New Hampshire early, other states later, for example). Perhaps I will learn more soon - I hope.