Harry Reid’s odd moment of silence

Sen. Harry Reid was silent for what might have been a record — eight seconds – as he struggled last week to answer what should have been a simple question: Is Donald Trump qualified to be president?

Answering questions from reporters over the loud din of people leaving a Hillary Clinton rally at the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers hall, Reid first looked down as he considered the query from political commentator Jon Ralston. His uncharacteristic speechlessness was followed by another incongruous gesture, a grin, as if Reid were contemplating some private joke.

“Jon, he’s the Republican nominee for president. That’s all it takes,” Reid finally replied.

When Ralston objected that Reid’s reply was no answer at all, Reid again lapsed into wordless grinning. He finally shrugged his shoulders. “I don’t want to be overconfident,” Reid said.

Reid unable — or unwilling — to hurl invective at Donald Trump? What strange place have we come to in Nevada politics? This is, after all, a man who’d just alighted from the stage after calling Trump an “egomaniac,” pledging not to mention him again, and then immediately breaking the pledge.

And “egomaniac” is the nicest thing Reid’s had to say about Trump in recent months. He’s called Trump too dangerous to receive legitimate intelligence briefings; said a Trump presidency would be “a nightmare” for the nation; and called Republicans unwilling to denounce Trump “cowards.”

So why silence now, especially from a man who has served as a partisan warrior for the Democrats and a lightning rod for Republican hate since he accepted the mantle of leadership?

Surely Reid realizes that, in the most literal sense, Trump is qualified under the Constitution: He’s at least 35 years old, he was born in the United States, and he’s lived in America for at least 14 years.

But this was no civics lesson. The question was about so much more. Is Trump morally qualified to be president? Does he have the intelligence, the experience, the temperament for the job? Can he be trusted to serve as commander in chief of the world’s most powerful military?

This was a tailor-made opportunity for Reid to repeat the talking points that Clinton has embraced since she accepted the Democratic nomination. “Imagine — if you dare, imagine — imagine him [Trump] in the Oval Office facing a real crisis,” Clinton said in her speech. “A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons.”

It’s not a matter of Reid having forgotten that line, either. Clinton had just repeated it on the stage. Not only that, she’d described Trump in terms of personal greed and political hypocrisy for several minutes.

How hard would it have been for Reid to have said, “No, I don’t think he’s qualified for the presidency”?

Surely the Republicans have had little hesitancy about denouncing Clinton in similar terms. From emails to trade deals, Benghazi to the rise of ISIS, right wingers have no trouble saying Clinton is unqualified to inherit the Oval Office. Would Mitch McConnell respond to a similar query with a mere shrug?

Perhaps Reid is concerned about rumors that the mercurial, unpredictable Trump might quit the race, claiming the system is rigged for Clinton, thus giving the GOP an opportunity to select a late replacement who might present a more difficult challenge. Adding to the voices that have already dismissed Trump as temperamentally unqualified for the job could help push Trump away, when Democrats may want just the opposite. Reid surely knows the tired political cliche: When your opponent is committing suicide, don’t interfere.

As Reid said, Trump is the GOP nominee. They’re stuck with him, qualified or not.

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at 702-387-5276 or SSebelius@reviewjournal.com.