Not that a capitalist like Rupert Murdoch needs political principles to back his business decisions, but it's interesting that he's planning to host a fundraiser for Hillary despite his reputation as a founding member of the vast right-wing conspiracy.
Rupert Murdoch, the conservative media mogul whose New York Post tabloid savaged Hillary Clinton’s initial aspirations to become a US senator for New York, has agreed to host a political fundraiser for her re-election campaign. ...One media lobbyist said: "Murdoch will be for the Republicans but he is also smart enough to know that the Republicans might not win. At some level, whether nationally or in New York, Hillary is the future and what savvy businessman would not want to put a line of interest in someone who will be the future?"
That's the kind of thinking a shareholder wants from a corporate executive, and exactly the opposite of what a voter should want from a politician. The joint fundraiser says more about Hillary's principles than Murdoch's.
Furthermore, this event is a good example of one reason businessmen may not make good politicians. I tend to think that the business world has a lot of good thinking to contribute to politics, but MBA-think can also lead to ideological compromise that might work to make money, but isn't the best way to run a country. Cf. President Bush.
Ideological compromise is exactly what we should have. If government is to be a reflection of the people it governs, there should be a lot more compromise in D.C. than there currently is.
Enter divided government.. and the ideological compromises and slow growth in spending it will bring.
I've thought a bit about compromise in politics. I wonder if it would be better to have compromise at the level of principle rather than at the level of legislation. As things stand, we have some leftist legislation and some rightist legislation, the result being contradictory pieces of legislature. If the argument were at the level of principle, rather than taking principle to be some unmovable property of an individual, would it be preferable?