It was the point I was trying to make, which seemed to be missing in the wedrifid/Porter discussion.

More generally, it's quite hard to become influential (even in non-democratic societies) without signalling that you have "common sense, good will, and a sense of responsibility." And the easiest way to signal that you have those virtues is to actually have them. Which isn't to say that your bad qualities (ambition, ruthlessness, and a lust for power) don't frequently outweigh them.

The only ones that could be said to interfere with each other are "good will" and "ruthlessness", and I don't think even those are fully incompatible.

Focusing on one's narrow interests (lust for power?) conflicts fairly strongly with my understanding of "sense of responsibility." YMMV