First things first: it would be helpful if everyone, Donald Trump included, could grow up and stop using words like “indiscretions” to soft-pedal Bill Clinton’s “alleged” affairs and alleged rape (which, despite Andrea Mitchell’s aside, was never “discredited,” a claim NBC News attempted to memory-hole from its video archive).

It’s been hypothesized that Hillary Clinton’s name-dropping of Alicia Machado was a trap that Trump just couldn’t avoid walking into, but make no mistake: Clinton won’t be making the same error. Asked Thursday night if she felt any obligation to speak out about a spouse’s past being brought into a campaign, Clinton just said no.

Again, that question, posed by a reporter on Air Hillary, was, “Do you, as someone who presumably wants more women to run for and win office, high office, do you feel any obligation, if Trump brings up your husband’s past, to speak out against a spouse’s indiscretions or past being brought into a campaign like this?”

That answer, again, was “No.”

Ridiculed as it was, Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” initiative made sense; a one-word answer shuts down any follow-up sales pitch by not feeding the questioner anything to counter.

Needless to say, Clinton’s supporters were thrilled with her answer; as we’ve reported, many of them saw no obligation for her to ever hold a press conference until after she’d been elected.

That’s the understatement of the year; Clinton even decided for herself that her right to privacy extended to all of her official email correspondence as secretary of state.

It’s a crazy thought, but if Clinton wanted to keep spouses out of the campaign, maybe she could stop talking about her “secret weapon” and citing his record during debates when asked about her plan to create jobs.