Charles Koch told ABC’s This Week‘s Jonathan Karl Sunday that he’s not sure he’d be opposed to another Clinton in the White House.
The Republican mega-donor and oil baron, who, over the last several years, has become the bogeyman of the left, described as a shady villain, pulling the strings on the Republican party from his dark and demented New York domain, argued that economic growth was better under Clinton than Bush. While he couldn’t say for sure that he’d pick Hillary over Donald Trump or Ted Cruz, he told Karl that he wasn’t willing to rule out the possibility, though he said he’d ‘have to believe her actions would have to be quite different than her rhetoric.”
The Kochs – Charles, and David his brother, had budgeted a cool $886 million to spend in the 2016 elections, mostly through SuperPACs, a number that’s roughly what the parties themselves also plan to spend. In 2012, just their company, Koch Industries, gave over $3 million.
But this isn’t the first time the Koch brothers have expressed a level of discomfort with the Republican field. The two brothers are libertarian, not straight conservative, and Charles has taken issue with Donald Trump’s ideas about “religious freedom,” and Trump’s overwhelming authoritarianism. And the two have sided more closely on Democrats when it comes to their pet issue: criminal justice reform.
Ted Cruz isn’t a natural fit for the Koch brothers either, given that the two brothers are pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, and anti-surveillance (if not also generally anti-war) – positions which have put them at odds with other big GOP players. Ted Cruz, who tens to lean more conservative than libertarian, is far from a Koch brother’s dream date.
And that leaves Clinton. For now, the only argument in her favor is her husband’s friendless with Wall Street and big business, which led the economy to significant growth, something Clinton himself would be loathe to claim complete credit for.
Until they make a decision on their preferred candidate, the Koch brothers will just have to spend their money on other “evil” things, we suppose.
