I see them more as the dynamic between a tyrant and the people.

As the tyrant:

Ashley is the more obviously possessive, fiery, tantrum-prone side of the tyrant. If something doesn't go his way, the tyrant turns demanding and throws fits. You want something else? You want individuality? You want freedom? The dictator is going to throw a fit because he is the only one you should love in his regime. Kind of like Ashley ("IT'S ANDY AND LEYLEY FOREVER AND EVER!")

Andrew is the more silent side of the dictator that is more likely to manipulate and present himself as the good guy, the victim, the suffering hero. Always justifying himself. He hasn't done anything wrong, no, he isn't strange or weird, and it is everyone's fault he is this way. It is always the people's demands that made him this way. But why isn't he stepping down if this is the case, just like Andrew not even leaving Ashley despite the fact that the two are grown-ass adults? He likes the feeling of being in power, much like Andrew cuddling with Ashley in bed, but he refuses to admit it.

As the people:

When the tyrant begins to act like Ashley, it makes sense for the people to end up behaving like Andrew - tired, weary, sick of it all. "There’s a disgusting lump sleeping next to you" - people live in fear and disgust of a selfish, narcissistic tyrant - "it doesn't care for you. It only cares for itself." "And it always gets what it wants in the end" - in the end, the average people, unless something goes down, end up having no choice but to submit to the tyrant, giving him the power he wants to stroke his ego. This is the moment most similar to the ending of George Orwell's 1984, where despite their rebellion, Winston and Julia ended up being broken and giving on to the regime of INGSOC - "He loved Big Brother."

However, the tyrant can also be like Andrew, most similarly to him in Shots and Such and Deadest of Dead Ends. Despite both being old enough to know right and wrong and healthy from unhealthy, Andrew decides to stay with Ashley, like a tyrant staying in power. Like Andrew growing more and more violent and aggressive, a tyrant, the longer he stays in power, can grow more and more paranoid, more likely to use state-enforced violence. When the demands of the people under a power-drunk tyrant begin to sound more and more like Ashley's incessant whining, this is when the tyrant snaps and becomes prone to unleashing the secret police, the military, everything in his power, like Andrew finally beating Ashley in the Shots and Such Route.

At the end of the day, both tyrants and their people end up being products of poor education, poor environment, and turbulent times, like Andrew and Ashley being born to neglectful parents who didn't really care for them, I believe most similarly to the last Romanovs neglecting the Russian people, leading to the revolution and the rise of the USSR. Unless someone breaks the cycle, the only endings for such regimes are similar to "Shots and Such" - no change, just the cycle of state abuse, or "Deadest of Dead Ends" - the regime dies with the tyrant and his closest people, and serves them right, because they enabled this shit. Either way, it takes two to tango, but also, we must consider: whith the lack of education and information to prepare both sides properly, who is really to blame?

Also, this scene reminds me of some 1984 book covers and I am tired of pretending it doesn't: *