(CNN)It wasn't supposed to be this way, at least not for Donald Trump.
Trump was always unlikely to win the female vote outright. After all, since the 1980s, Democratic candidates have consistently secured the support of more women than their Republican rivals. But his team no doubt hoped they could put enough of a dent in Clinton's support with female voters -- and expand the Republican advantage with college-educated white women -- to put the White House within reach.
Clearly, security moms are rising up, and that's because their concerns are increasingly not just about national security, but personal security, too. The same demographic that has traditionally been good to Republican candidates -white, college-educated, suburban mothers -- has no time for sexual bragging and taunts in someone who wants to be president. These women seem intent on voting on issues related to their personal space, physical well-being, and their memories of those situations -- big and small -- that mark a world where there is still social inequality. These "security moms" are above all parents, and they have recoiled at the defense being trotted out that this was just "locker room" talk, and they are frustrated with the men and women who have defended such conduct. As a result, the same way that homeland security is no longer just about terrorism, the "security moms" are no longer just about ISIS or al Qaeda. In my field, we use the term "all-hazards" to reflect how America's security apparatus has changed since the terror attacks of 9/11 -- and how it needs to think about every type of risk, whether it be from ISIS, climate change, cyberattacks or gun violence. Now, it seems, security moms are taking a similarly broad view of security: To them, it is about protecting their homes and children, whatever the threat. They have, in short, embraced an all-hazards approach to their own security.
1/1 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)