What was the first presidential election year when women voters surpassed men as a percentage of the electorate? The answer is 1984. In that year, the electorate was 53 percent female and 47 percent male. That year, President Ronald Reagan and Vice President George H. W. Bush defeated former Vice President Walter Mondale and Rep. Geraldine Ferraro in a historic landslide. Four years earlier, in Reagan’s 1980 landslide, the electorate had been 51 percent men and 49 percent women.  Since 1984, women have decisively outvoted men in every presidential election. Forty years later, unique social factors could motivate a record number of women to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris. But before discussing those factors, let’s review female voting data from the last two presidential elections, showing how Harris could win where Hillary Clinton lost. Consider the 2020 election. Men were 48 percent of the electorate, and women were 52 percent, among whom Biden-Harris won by a 15-point margin. On Monday, an NBC News poll found Harris leading among women by 19 points. Trump’s advantage with men was 12 points. Given that a larger turnout usually translates into more female voters, the vice president’s strength with women could be her path to victory if the electorate’s female voter turnout exceeds the four-point advantage of 2020. Interestingly, in 2016, the electorate’s gender composition was the same as in 2020, with women casting 52 percent of the votes. However, of that 52 percent female electorate, Hillary Clinton won only 54 percent, compared to 57 percent for Joe Biden in 2020. Could Harris renew Obama’s coalition with a female turnout that mirrors his 2008 and 2012 victories? In those elections, the electorate was 53 percent women and 47 percent men, a six-point difference. (Women had the most influence in 2004, when George W. Bush was reelected with women comprising 54 percent of voters.)   Let's turn to the “unique social factors” that might benefit Harris and stimulate record-breaking female turnout listed by uniqueness and not political importance. First, Harris's campaign doesn't seem to be playing up the prospect of her becoming the first female president. Is that intentional? Maybe. Women know that a Harris victory would be historic, but most are not casting their vote because she is a woman. Today’s circumstances feel light years from Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, when she was deliberately running to be the “first woman president” and “breaking the glass ceiling” and made it clear.  Is the novelty of “President Harris” being downplayed because she has been the incumbent Vice President Harris since January 2021? Or is it because Harris’s presidential nomination was a welcome surprise alternative to the dreaded Trump-Biden rematch, and she happens to be a woman? I can only guess why this historic first seems so understated on the campaign trail. Nonetheless, if Harris wins, her sex will be the headline, with women celebrating in the streets 104 years after receiving the right to vote. Second, mothers, teachers and anyone involved in raising children are keenly aware of role-models and the influence of celebrities. Hence the question, “Is Donald Trump a role model for your children or students?” And also, “Is Kamala Harris a better role model than Trump?” Good or bad, the president is a role model by default. A third potential Harris advantage is female intuition. Women voters notice that Melania Trump has not been out and about supporting her husband’s campaign. Her absence speaks volumes about his controversial character. Instead, the former first lady has been promoting her “Melania” book, intentionally drawing attention to and defending her decades-old nude modeling career. Moreover, the book release date is October 8, a curious time if it generates bad press or flops. The real eye-opener is that nowhere on MelaniaTrump.com is Donald Trump mentioned or pictured. No polls will quantify Melania as an obstacle to Trump's campaign, but women voters do think about who will be first lady or first gentleman and the loving support that person offers the president. Fourth, where is Ivanka? Trump’s favorite offspring has disappeared from the campaign trail. Again, women notice abnormal family dynamics when making voting decisions. Meanwhile, Trump campaigns with RNC co-chair and daughter-in-law Lara Trump, former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) and Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) to attract female voters. Recently, much attention was paid to Trump palling around with the controversial Laura Loomer, who flaunted their relationship, posting suggestive photos and headline-making videos. But Loomer has been sidelined after her toxic high profile created a short-lived MAGA civil war. Fifth, another campaign phenomenon that could drive female turnout for Harris is the Trump campaign appearing to denigrate women who don’t have biological children. Millions of stepmothers and women who are childless by choice were deeply offended. Sixth, abortion is a sacred life-issue turned into a political message war. Trump has been shifting his position leftward (depending on the audience) but continues to make outlandish abortion-related paternalistic statements, for example, telling women, “I am your protector.” Harris, a long-time champion of abortion rights, has branded and positioned abortion as representing freedom, personal rights, health care and an example of government interference. The 2024 presidential election is the first since the 2022 Supreme Court Dobbs ruling, which could become a monumental driver of female turnout on both sides of this passionate issue. In the voting booth, women consider the economy, inflation, immigration and abortion as the most critical issues in their choice between Trump and Harris. But don't underestimate women’s intuition about family, character and the historical nature of Harris’s candidacy, all of which could generate a surprise record-breaking female turnout that the polls are not detecting. Myra Adams is an opinion writer who served on the creative team of two Republican presidential campaigns in 2004 and 2008.