That is how controlled opposition works. The only possible way to ensure you always wins is to be both sides.
And the House always wins.
The reasonable assumption is that it's "all about winning." But it's not about just winning. It's about controlling the narrative, ensuring all people focus on the "opposition," never knowing there is a man behind the curtain controlling "both sides" or even that there is a curtain at all.
You can read a great deal of that in my book. Other sections are currently unpublished, though I suggest what is there fully supports the statement that "EVERYTHING is controlled opposition," i.e. there are no independent agents, and how could there be?
That is how controlled opposition works. The only possible way to ensure you always wins is to be both sides.
And the House always wins.
The reasonable assumption is that it's "all about winning." But it's not about just winning. It's about controlling the narrative, ensuring all people focus on the "opposition," never knowing there is a man behind the curtain controlling "both sides" or even that there is a curtain at all.
You can read a great deal of that in my book. Other sections are currently unpublished, though I suggest what is there fully supports the statement that "EVERYTHING is controlled opposition," i.e. there are no independent agents, and how could there be?