The Conservative Caucus Podcast #02 – Darryl Wood on the “Run to Win” Show
Published: August 20, 2025
Network: Darryl
Analysis: Conservative Caucus President Jim Pfaff
On Election Day 2024, Conservative Caucus President Jim Pfaff provided a detailed analysis of Donald Trump’s path to an Trump electoral victory, predicting a decisive win with 311-315 electoral votes. Speaking with Darryl Wood on Detroit’s “Run to Win” radio show, Pfaff dissected early voting trends, demographic shifts, and battleground state dynamics that pointed toward a Republican breakthrough in the crucial swing states that would determine the presidency.
Topics Covered
- Early Voting Trends Signal Republican Momentum
- Pennsylvania’s Crumbling Blue Wall
- Demographic Shifts: Black Voters and Union Members
- The Muslim Vote Factor in Michigan
- Electoral College Math and Victory Scenarios
- Key Takeaways
Early Voting Trends Signal Republican Momentum
Drawing on over three decades of campaign experience, Pfaff identified early voting patterns as the most significant indicator of a potential Trump electoral victory. The data revealed a dramatic shift from 2020, particularly in the composition of who was casting ballots before Election Day.
“Based on the early voting turnout, you would easily from an objective analysis come to the conclusion in all the swing states that matter, Donald Trump’s get out the vote effort is significant,” Pfaff explained. This represented a fundamental change in Republican strategy, with the Trump campaign successfully mobilizing early voters in unprecedented numbers.
Low-Propensity Voters: The X-Factor
Pfaff highlighted that a significant portion of early Republican voters were “low propensity voters”—citizens who don’t vote regularly. This demographic shift suggested the Trump campaign wasn’t merely cannibalizing Election Day votes but was expanding the Republican electorate by bringing new voters into the process. High-propensity voters, Pfaff noted, would turn out regardless of when they voted, making these additional low-propensity voters a net gain for the campaign.
Pennsylvania’s Crumbling Blue Wall
Pennsylvania emerged as the centerpiece of Pfaff’s electoral analysis, with dramatic changes in early voting patterns suggesting a potential Republican breakthrough in this critical battleground state.
“You see this in Pennsylvania where the blue wall as they call it of early voting in 2020 was somewhere between one and one and a half million early votes and this year that blue wall is only 400,000.”
— Jim Pfaff, President, The Conservative Caucus
This collapse in the Democratic early voting advantage represented more than just a statistical anomaly—it fundamentally altered the electoral calculus. Pfaff emphasized that Pennsylvania represented a “must-win state” for Kamala Harris, predicting that a loss there would effectively end her path to victory regardless of outcomes in other battlegrounds.
The analysis focused particularly on Philadelphia, where Pfaff cited insights from Cliff Maloney, a key figure in Trump’s Pennsylvania get-out-the-vote operation. Philadelphia’s early reporting and historical Democratic margins made it a bellwether for the entire state. Lower-than-expected turnout in the city would signal broader problems for the Harris campaign across urban centers nationwide.
Demographic Shifts: Black Voters and Union Members
Two demographic groups traditionally considered Democratic strongholds showed signs of significant movement toward Republicans, potentially reshaping the electoral map in ways that would facilitate a Trump electoral victory.
The Black Male Vote
Pfaff identified declining turnout and shifting preferences among Black voters, particularly Black men, as a critical factor in multiple swing states. “Black voters in larger urban areas are not turning out in the numbers that the Democrat party says it needs to see,” he noted, confirming reports from multiple sources on the ground.
This trend carried particular significance in cities like Detroit and Philadelphia, where Democratic candidates typically rely on overwhelming margins to offset Republican strength in suburban and rural areas. Even modest shifts in Black voter participation or preference could prove decisive in closely contested states.
Union Membership Breaks from Leadership
Perhaps even more surprising was the evidence of a growing divide between union leadership and rank-and-file membership. Pfaff highlighted the United Steelworkers members standing behind Trump at a Pittsburgh rally as symbolic of a broader trend.
“When United Auto Workers guys and gals, when they hear Donald Trump talk about we’re not going to have be selling your cars that you’re making in Mexico, you’re going to have to make them here. That just sings to United Auto Worker to most United Auto Worker people.”
— Jim Pfaff
The Teamsters’ decision not to endorse either candidate—combined with internal polling showing approximately 60% of members supporting Trump—provided objective evidence of this shift. Pfaff suggested that traditional unions like the UAW, Steelworkers, and Teamsters were experiencing similar dynamics, with trade policy and manufacturing jobs resonating more powerfully than leadership endorsements.
The Muslim Vote Factor in Michigan
Michigan presented unique electoral dynamics due to its substantial Arab and Muslim American population, concentrated particularly in the Dearborn area. Pfaff identified this demographic as potentially decisive in a state where margins are traditionally razor-thin.
The surprise endorsement of Trump by Muslim community leaders at a Michigan rally the night before the election signaled both immediate and historical shifts. “It indicates that that urging, that thinking of voting for Trump in the Muslim community has been stirring up over time,” Pfaff analyzed, suggesting the endorsement reflected sentiment that had been building rather than a last-minute decision.
The Withholding Vote Strategy
Pfaff and Wood discussed how the Muslim vote would impact the election through two mechanisms: direct votes for Trump and withheld votes from Harris. Estimates suggested 75,000 to over 100,000 Arab and Muslim voters in metropolitan Detroit might withhold support from Harris due to dissatisfaction with the Biden-Harris administration’s Middle East policies. In a state Trump won by fewer than 11,000 votes in 2016 and lost by approximately 154,000 in 2020, even a fraction of this demographic shift could prove decisive.
Pfaff acknowledged that not all Muslim voters could “stomach voting for Trump” given his relatively pro-Israel positions, but argued that their unwillingness to support Harris was equally significant to the electoral outcome.
Electoral College Math and Victory Scenarios
Throughout the interview, Pfaff provided specific electoral college projections based on his analysis of available data, offering both floor and ceiling scenarios for a Trump electoral victory.
His baseline prediction ranged from 311 to 315 electoral votes for Trump, a figure he had been forecasting “almost all year.” This projection assumed victories in Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, Nevada, and Wisconsin, with Michigan as a likely but less certain addition.
Pfaff established what he called “the floor” at 286 electoral votes—a scenario where Trump lost both Michigan and Wisconsin but secured Pennsylvania. “I really do believe that for Kamala Harris, Pennsylvania is a must-win state. I think if she loses Pennsylvania, it’s over with,” he emphasized.
“The question is how big will Trump’s win be? That’s where I feel like the floor is based upon all the stuff that I’m looking at right now. But I feel very confident it’s going to break 300 in electoral votes for him.”
— Jim Pfaff
National Polls vs. Electoral Reality
Pfaff provided crucial context for interpreting national polling data, which showed an extremely close race. He explained that national polls in presidential elections serve primarily as indicators of general electorate mood rather than predictive tools for state-by-state outcomes.
“When you consider the fact that Donald Trump is either down or up by one or two points in the national polls, if that number plays out tonight, then Kamala Harris really has no path to victory,” Pfaff argued. His reasoning centered on the concentration of Democratic votes in non-competitive states like California and New York, meaning a close national popular vote would translate to Trump advantages in swing states.
The Female Vote and Abortion Issue
Addressing concerns about female voter turnout favoring Harris, Pfaff offered a nuanced analysis. While acknowledging that women were voting in larger early voting numbers and that Harris held advantages with female voters in polling, he questioned the assumption that all female early votes would benefit Democrats.
“Just because it’s all female votes, that’s not all going to Kamala Harris. There are a whole bunch of motivated Trump women,” he noted. He also pointed out that men statistically tend to vote on Election Day in greater numbers, suggesting that male turnout on Election Day could balance or exceed early female voting patterns.
On the abortion issue—which proved decisive in the 2022 midterms following the Dobbs decision—Pfaff acknowledged it remained an energizing factor for Democrats but argued the circumstances had changed. “Obviously, the Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade that year and so it was still a visceral thing. That’s not the same at this stage,” he explained, suggesting the issue had lost some of its immediate urgency two years later.
Macomb County and Michigan’s Path
For Michigan specifically, Pfaff identified Macomb County as a critical factor, noting its decisive role in Trump’s 2016 victory in the state. Combined with the Muslim vote factor and potential shifts in Detroit’s Wayne County, he saw multiple pathways to a Michigan win.
“It’s possible that Trump could win Michigan with two to three points. I think that’s possible. I’m not predicting it, but I think it’s possible,” Pfaff stated, while maintaining confidence that Trump would “at least pull it out” with a narrower margin.
Key Takeaways
- Early Voting Transformation – Republican early voting surged across swing states, with Pennsylvania’s Democratic early vote advantage collapsing from 1-1.5 million in 2020 to just 400,000 in 2024, fundamentally altering the electoral landscape.
- Low-Propensity Voter Mobilization – A significant portion of Republican early voters were low-propensity voters who don’t regularly participate in elections, representing genuine expansion of the GOP electorate rather than cannibalization of Election Day votes.
- Pennsylvania as the Firewall – Pfaff identified Pennsylvania as a must-win state for Harris, predicting that a loss there would eliminate her path to victory regardless of other outcomes, with Philadelphia turnout serving as an early indicator.
- Demographic Shifts in Traditional Democratic Constituencies – Black voters, particularly Black men, showed signs of lower turnout and increased Trump support, while union rank-and-file members increasingly diverged from their leadership’s endorsements, with trade policy resonating strongly.
- Michigan’s Muslim Vote Factor – The Muslim and Arab American community in Michigan, estimated at 75,000-100,000 voters in metropolitan Detroit, showed significant movement toward Trump or away from Harris, potentially decisive in a traditionally close state.
- Electoral College Floor and Ceiling – Pfaff projected a Trump electoral victory ranging from a floor of 286 votes (losing Michigan and Wisconsin but winning Pennsylvania) to 311-315 votes (sweeping most battlegrounds), with confidence the total would exceed 300.
- National Polls Misleading in Close Races – National polling showing a tie or narrow margin actually favored Trump in the Electoral College due to concentration of Democratic votes in non-competitive states like California and New York.
- Abortion Issue Less Potent Than 2022 – While still energizing for Democrats, the abortion issue appeared less visceral and immediate than in the 2022 midterms immediately following the Dobbs decision, reducing its potential impact on turnout.
Share This Analysis
Join The Conservative Caucus
Stand with thousands of Americans defending constitutional principles and the rule of law.
About The Conservative Caucus:
The Conservative Caucus is a grassroots public policy action organization, formed in 1974. Headed by President Jim Pfaff, the Caucus is committed to advancing free enterprise, limited government, and traditional values.
Originally broadcast August 20, 2025 on Darryl.
Peter J. Thomas is a veteran conservative political strategist and seasoned policy expert dedicated to upholding the principles of the Constitution and democracy. As a founder and the chairman of the Conservative Caucus, he has played a pivotal role in promoting and shaping the conservative agenda across the nation for over half a century.