There are (at least) two views to this, I think. One view is that the personal and business aspects of a persons life are separate and one shouldn't necessarily

There are (at least) two views to this, I think. One view is that the personal and business aspects of a persons life are separate and one shouldn't necessarily affect the other, which is the argument that Sam Altman is making here. The second view is that they are definitely linked, and allowing someone to do something morally reprehensible (if you consider supporting Donald Trump that) means that they aren't with the vision of the company and it's fine to fire them. The reality is that it depends on the level of the person in the organization (as well as the organization itself, but that's not part of this argument). For example, if a janitor supports Donald Trump, that doesn't really affect the business because no one outside the organization thinks that the janitor is representative of the organization as a whole. However, if a C-level employee did something that's considered morally reprehensible, it can affect the business because people associate the business with the people that run it. In this case, I don't agree that Thiel should be "fired" because people wouldn't immediately associate Thiel with the company and he doesn't "work" full time with them (he's a part time partner). If Sam Altman had come out in support of Trump with a donation that would be a different story.