- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Does anyone else think the ballroom is going to look terrible
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:30 pm to baybeefeetz
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:30 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:It is mostly point-of-view distortion, though the new East Wing will indeed have a larger footprint than the Residence and the West Wing (combined).
That pic cannot be real
0
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:32 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Great point. They should make a tiny ballroom because those are super useful
Or they could just build the official ballroom elsewhere? You know, use logic?
I'm not opposed to remodeling the WH or anything, but if it looks like shite, it looks like shite. No harm in being honest.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:36 pm to BBONDS25
Because it’s totally unnecessary, 200plus million dollars and we have historically high debt levels with more debt than we have gdp.
I’m a fiscal conservative. I wish more voters were as well.
I’m a fiscal conservative. I wish more voters were as well.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:50 pm to Wally Sparks
quote:
I do think the renderings could've been more sharp/clear and be more upfront on what was getting demoed early on.
To anyone pretending to or being told to care about this, this wouldn’t have mattered at all
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:54 pm to IMSA_Fan
I've seen pictures of the concept art. It looks like it will be beautiful. If the ballroom is a part of the white house. Then it will just make the White House bigger. Just like Trump changing the Dept. of Defense into the Dept. of War. America is no longer reactive. It is proactive. America is not a Colonial Power in decline. We are at its Zenith.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:58 pm to IMSA_Fan
quote:
The White House wasn’t built to be a palace.
Uhhhm, yes it was....
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:00 pm to IMSA_Fan
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:02 pm to Barstools
quote:Original name was "Executive Mansion," and that was eventually discarded because it was not egalitarian.quote:Uhhhm, yes it was....
The White House wasn’t built to be a palace.
Definitely not a "palace."
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 6:14 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:02 pm to IMSA_Fan
Has Trump ever built anything that looked terrible?
No is the answer
No is the answer
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:09 pm to The Torch
It's going to be big and beautiful.
I hope they hold a UFC event at it.
I hope they hold a UFC event at it.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
If presidents wanted to load everyone up into vans and haul them offsite for every White House event, arrange massive security details, and manage a logistics nightmare, they could have done that already. Hence the tents.
And you personally not liking how it looks means exactly nothing to any human who matters.
And you personally not liking how it looks means exactly nothing to any human who matters.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
not opposed to remodeling the WH or anything, but if it looks like shite, it looks like shite. No harm in being honest
Don’t quit your day job
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:24 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:As I said above, I have no problem with construction of a White House ballroom. In fact, I support it. Trump is correct. A facility of this sort is probably something that we have needed for a very long time.
If presidents wanted to load everyone up into vans and haul them offsite for every White House event, arrange massive security details, and manage a logistics nightmare, they could have done that already. Hence the tents.
And you personally not liking how it looks means exactly nothing to any human who matters.
But Trump undertaking the project in the manner he has undertaken it (bypassing the Trust, etcetera) is the functional equivalent of taking out his pocket knife and carving his initials into the top of the Resolute Desk.
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 6:26 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:41 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
You'd be wrong. The WH has been rennovated repeatedly, as recently as Obama's private basketball arena and literally no gave a frick.
that must be why the basketball court had been brought up over and over again in this thread
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:43 pm to beaux duke
quote:
that must be why the basketball court had been brought up over and over again in this thread
Anyone whining about a ballroom being built at the fricking White House is a complete moron. Guess how many other presidents mentioned wanting one? You ignorant rube.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:44 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
But Trump undertaking the project in the manner he has undertaken it (bypassing the Trust, etcetera) is the functional equivalent of taking out his pocket knife and carving his initials into the top of the Resolute Desk
So you prefer taxpayers pay it.
Unreal. Where specifically are his initials?This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 6:45 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:52 pm to BBONDS25
quote:Not at all. I have few problems with private donations paying for the renovations. There is always a concern about selling influence, but that applies equally to any president and to any similar project.quote:So you prefer taxpayers pay it.
But Trump undertaking the project in the manner he has undertaken it (bypassing the Trust, etcetera) is the functional equivalent of taking out his pocket knife and carving his initials into the top of the Resolute Desk
My point is that, while presidents are not legally REQUIRED to get Trust review of plans for this sort of project (because the White House, the SCOTUS Building and the Capitol are exempt from that requirement, as I recall), Presidents have still always done so.
Why?
Because most Presidents have recognized that permanent changes to a national treasure such as the White House should be vetted for aesthetics and such by someone OTHER than the person who came up with the idea, given that this sort of change will be remaining in place for generations.
Hence my comparison to unilateral vandalism to a national treasure such as the Resolute Desk.
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 6:58 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:52 pm to BBONDS25
oops. double post. sorry.
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 6:54 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:53 pm to BBONDS25
triple post? How does that happen?
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 6:54 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 6:57 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:Obama's hoops setup was basically a gallon of paint to add a few lines to the tennis court and a mobile basketball goal/backboard that could be rolled away on five minutes' notice.
The WH has been rennovated repeatedly, as recently as Obama's private basketball arena and literally no (one?) gave a frick.
The permanence and scale were just a LITTLE different.
Obama and his wife DID make a number of more substantive renovations, including some changes to the White House Dining Room. As I recall, he did vet those changes with the Trust before undertaking them.
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 7:22 pm
Page 11 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News