Fetterman defends Trump's 'tasteful' $200M White House ballroom makeover

[thegeneral 3,540]

2 minutes ago, Maximum Overkill said:

So you really believe that Trump has the ability to write a check from The White House account to pay for a new ballroom? 

You're an idiot if you believe that 

What?

[dogcows 1,048]

On 10/20/2025 at 7:47 PM, thegeneral said:

When he’s finished here he should put his head on top of the Washington Monument like a giant Pez dispenser.

Make sure the giant waxed puusay he calls a neck is on there too.

He already moved a statute of George Washington out of the Washington Monument and into the Rose Garden.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/white-house-adds-george-washington-statue-rose-garden-rcna237003

[jerryskids 7,048]

On 10/20/2025 at 12:42 PM, SaintsInDome2006 said:

This is & telling in a number of ways.

 

 

On 10/20/2025 at 1:15 PM, SaintsInDome2006 said:

How do you personally feel about the White House as a national monument & symbol?

 

On 10/20/2025 at 1:42 PM, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Seaf, it’s cool. I treasure American history & its iconic symbols. Also just in general doing something of this magnitude without Congressional approval is wrong & unconstitutional. I know how you feel about things & where you fall ideologically. So it’s cool, it’s not a problem for you, got it.

Please.  The east wing was a functional extension added in the last century; it's not some paragon of historical significance.  It is mostly offices.  If you disagree, please point to your apoplexy regarding Saint Barack the Perfect violating the sanctity of the office area with a basketball court!   

On 10/20/2025 at 2:28 PM, MDC said:

I couldn’t care less about this, but I will laugh at the tacky makeover when it ends up looking like a disco from Scarface.  

Melania is arguably the most stylish First Lady ever, but the public largely doesn't know it because the MSDNC doesn't talk about it.  Instead, the MSM pines for the days of Jill Biden wearing plaid tops and striped pants.   

[Maximum Overkill 2,376]

38 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

 

 

 

Please.  The east wing was a functional extension added in the last century; it's not some paragon of historical significance.  It is mostly offices.  If you disagree, please point to your apoplexy regarding Saint Barack the Perfect violating the sanctity of the office area with a basketball court!   

Melania is arguably the most stylish First Lady ever, but the public largely doesn't know it because the MSDNC doesn't talk about it.  Instead, the MSM pines for the days of Jill Biden wearing plaid tops and striped pants.   

@MDC Says Melania is a pig but that Michelle Obama is beautiful. 

He's obviously a Power Bottom 

[thegeneral 3,540]

42 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Melania is arguably the most stylish First Lady ever, but the public largely doesn't know it because the MSDNC doesn't talk about it.  Instead, the MSM pines for the days of Jill Biden wearing plaid tops and striped pants.   

I enjoyed Melania’s stylish nudes. 

[Maximum Overkill 2,376]

9 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

I enjoyed Melania’s stylish nudes. 

Does a nude female frighten you? Does your wife get naked or does she wear a sheet when you F once a year? 

Only an assshole would make a dumb statement like that. 

[seafoam1 3,384]

3 minutes ago, Maximum Overkill said:

Does a nude female frighten you? Does your wife get naked or does she wear a sheet when you F once a year? 

Only an assshole would make a dumb statement like that. 

His wife has a mustache. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,520]

1 hour ago, seafoam1 said:

His wife has a mustache. 

And a c0ck

[squistion 2,467]

 

[Maximum Overkill 2,376]

3 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

His wife has a mustache. 

And higher testosterone levels 

[seafoam1 3,384]

2 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

And a c0ck

It's funny because thegenital himself is dealing with vaginal odor as his wife is dealing with pemus envy. 

[Ron_Artest 2,127]

It is symbolic watching him literally destroy the white house.

Also no surprise the trump cucks are here defending everything he does.

He did lie, but he always lies.  This didn't go for any kind of architectural or historical review.

He doesn't respect the country or it's history.  First the rose garden paving over, then the car lot flags, now the destruction of the east wing and the construction of a football field sized ballroom fitting for a man with small d problems.

[TimHauck 3,273]

8 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

so the renovation is ok, but the size of the renovation isnt, cause Trump

you realize every time they hold events they have to set up a tent, a freaking tent in the white house grounds.  Surprised this hasn't been built before

 

Well yeah, the size of the renovation is what is causing the outrage and for people to say the White House is “being destroyed.”  I wouldn’t go quite that far, but it’s certainly much closer to that than any renovation since and probably including under Truman.

Anyone comparing this to Obama converting an outdoor tennis court to a tennis court that can also be a basketball court is an idiot.

[Ron_Artest 2,127]

There were no environmental studies done.  I'm sure there is no asbestos in that 80 year old building.  Shred it.  Trump should personally observe closely.

[seafoam1 3,384]

8 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Well yeah, the size of the renovation is what is causing the outrage and for people to say the White House is “being destroyed.”  I wouldn’t go quite that far, but it’s certainly much closer to that than any renovation since and probably including under Truman.

Anyone comparing this to Obama converting an outdoor tennis court to a tennis court that can also be a basketball court is an idiot.

Oh no!! Liberals are saying something? 

Liberals are saying the White House belongs to the people of the US. 

And the people of the US voted in Trump. So suck bltch. 

[TimHauck 3,273]

Oh and the reason Truman did such extensive renovations was that it was deemed unsafe for occupancy and was facing the possibility of collapsing.

[Ron_Artest 2,127]

6 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Oh and the reason Truman did such extensive renovations was that it was deemed unsafe for occupancy and was facing the possibility of collapsing.

And it got congressional approval.

No approval here.  Whatever trump says goes.  They will also tell you he's not a king, with a straight face.

 

[squistion 2,467]

 

 

[thegeneral 3,540]

7 hours ago, Maximum Overkill said:

Does a nude female frighten you? Does your wife get naked or does she wear a sheet when you F once a year? 

Only an assshole would make a dumb statement like that. 

I enjoyed them. So did Don that’s why he put the order in for her. It’s true love!

[BrahmaBulls 908]

24/7 Rent Free in your heads with the same group.   Hilarious.

[squistion 2,467]

 

[Tree of Knowledge 2,094]

If you are upset over this but were silent when Barrack Hussein Obama and his man-Wife spent $376 million of taxpayer money in 2010 to refurbish the White House, you probably have TDS. 

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2025/10/22/2010_flashback_cnn_reports_on_376_million_white_house_construction_under_obama.html

 

 

[Drizzay 741]

Faux outrage is what this board does best.

[squistion 2,467]

Fun Facts from Twitter:

Terrorists tried to destroy the White House in 2001 with a hijacked plane.

24 years later the President of the United States accepts a plane from people funding terrorists and is destroying the White House himself.

[Strike 5,968]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Well yeah, the size of the renovation is what is causing the outrage and for people to say the White House is “being destroyed.”  I wouldn’t go quite that far, but it’s certainly much closer to that than any renovation since and probably including under Truman.

Anyone comparing this to Obama converting an outdoor tennis court to a tennis court that can also be a basketball court is an idiot.

Moving the goalposts again?  Because for days the narrative has been that he said the construction wouldn't touch the WH.  NOTHING about the "size" of the ballroom.  

[Tree of Knowledge 2,094]

12 minutes ago, squistion said:

Fun Facts from Twitter:

Terrorists tried to destroy the White House in 2001 with a hijacked plane.

24 years later the President of the United States accepts a plane from people funding terrorists and is destroying the White House himself.

Kyle Griffin?

[TimHauck 3,273]

19 minutes ago, Strike said:

Moving the goalposts again?  Because for days the narrative has been that he said the construction wouldn't touch the WH.  NOTHING about the "size" of the ballroom.  

The lie about “not touching it” was part of it, which of course is still a valid complaint and proven to be a lie, but the main complaint was about the WH “being destroyed,” which obviously is a reference to the extent of the renovations.

[Ron_Artest 2,127]

56 minutes ago, Tree of Knowledge said:

If you are upset over this but were silent when Barrack Hussein Obama and his man-Wife spent $376 million of taxpayer money in 2010 to refurbish the White House, you probably have TDS. 

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2025/10/22/2010_flashback_cnn_reports_on_376_million_white_house_construction_under_obama.html

 

 

You're a clown.

Here are the facts:

The White House Big Dig was the name used in press reports to describe a multi-year construction project at the White House that began in September 2010 and temporarily concluded in 2012, with a second phase planned for the future. According to the General Services Administration (GSA), the $376-million project, which involved a multi-story excavation adjacent to the West Wing, was to replace electrical wiring and update air conditioning. A second phase of the project, with an unannounced start date, will involve a similar excavation adjacent to the East Wing. Funds for the White House Big Dig were allocated by a congressional appropriation made in late 2001.^[1][2]

[Strike 5,968]

7 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

The lie about “not touching it” was part of it, which of course is still a valid complaint and proven to be a lie, but the main complaint was about the WH “being destroyed,” which obviously is a reference to the extent of the renovations.

No, the size is a new talking point. You don't get to rewrite history.

[jerryskids 7,048]

4 hours ago, Ron_Artest said:

It is symbolic watching him literally destroy the white house.

Also no surprise the trump cucks are here defending everything he does.

He did lie, but he always lies.  This didn't go for any kind of architectural or historical review.

He doesn't respect the country or it's history.  First the rose garden paving over, then the car lot flags, now the destruction of the east wing and the construction of a football field sized ballroom fitting for a man with small d problems.

If the bolded is true and generally done, then i object to not getting it.

3 hours ago, Ron_Artest said:

And it got congressional approval.

No approval here.  Whatever trump says goes.  They will also tell you he's not a king, with a straight face.

 

Congressional approval for... funding?  Or does congress have its own historical committee?

[Ron_Artest 2,127]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

If the bolded is true and generally done, then i object to not getting it.

Congressional approval for... funding?  Or does congress have its own historical committee?

Congress has oversight, on everything, but Congress has abdicated its responsibilities to the president.  Hence the No Kings rallies.

Society of Architectural Historians makes a statement against the project: https://sah.org/2025/10/16/statement-on-theproposed-ballroom-addition-at-the-white-house/

Chief Historian of the White House Historical Association Edward Lengel - "All of the founders would be disgusted." - 

 

This dude explains it

 

 

 

[jerryskids 7,048]

11 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

Congress has oversight, on everything, but Congress has abdicated its responsibilities to the president.  Hence the No Kings rallies.

Society of Architectural Historians makes a statement against the project: https://sah.org/2025/10/16/statement-on-theproposed-ballroom-addition-at-the-white-house/

Chief Historian of the White House Historical Association Edward Lengel - "All of the founders would be disgusted." - 

 

This dude explains it

 

 

 

Good info, thanks.  From your first link:

Quote

While the White House is exempt from the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 that requires federal agencies to consider the effects of federal projects on historic properties, given the exemplary significance of this site, we urge the White House to follow a meticulous review of any proposed demolition and new construction. 

I wonder why that is.  Regardless, I'd say that between this and the lack of funding, Trump has deemed Congressional approval unnecessary.  Also, if he went through the desired reviews, ground wouldn't break before he leaves office.  Trump isn't a patient guy.

Sometimes it is good to be "biased to action", but in this case, I agree with you blue haired sky screamers that Trump should have gone through a formal review and approval process.

I do think a ballroom is a good addition, though.  The richest country in the world shouldn't have to rent propane heaters every time the president hosts an event.

[TimHauck 3,273]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

Moving the goalposts again?  Because for days the narrative has been that he said the construction wouldn't touch the WH.  NOTHING about the "size" of the ballroom.  

The narrative from who exactly?

[Ron_Artest 2,127]

24 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Good info, thanks.  From your first link:

I wonder why that is.  Regardless, I'd say that between this and the lack of funding, Trump has deemed Congressional approval unnecessary.  Also, if he went through the desired reviews, ground wouldn't break before he leaves office.  Trump isn't a patient guy.

Sometimes it is good to be "biased to action", but in this case, I agree with you blue haired sky screamers that Trump should have gone through a formal review and approval process.

I do think a ballroom is a good addition, though.  The richest country in the world shouldn't have to rent propane heaters every time the president hosts an event.

There is a state room that can host up to 200 people, but yeah for the once every 4 years or such that we do have a larger event, it's climate controlled tents, and this is not like pop up tailgate tents, these are nice facilities.

There are certainly downsides to building a permanent football field sized ballroom, which is why it was never done.

Will be curious to see what happens to it once Trump finally dies or leaves the WH, whenever that will be.

[Strike 5,968]

10 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

The narrative from who exactly?

From the Dems and the media.  All the outrage has been about him touching the WH.  Only in the past day or two has the messaging shifted to the scale and/or the "historical" aspects of the project.  Apparently the original reasoning for outrage didn't resonate so your side pivoted.  Which is just more proof of how fake your outrage is.

[TimHauck 3,273]

3 minutes ago, Strike said:

From the Dems and the media.  All the outrage has been about him touching the WH.  Only in the past day or two has the messaging shifted to the scale and/or the "historical" aspects of the project.  Apparently the original reasoning for outrage didn't resonate so your side pivoted.  Which is just more proof of how fake your outrage is.

Link?

[thegeneral 3,540]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

From the Dems and the media.  All the outrage has been about him touching the WH.  Only in the past day or two has the messaging shifted to the scale and/or the "historical" aspects of the project.  Apparently the original reasoning for outrage didn't resonate so your side pivoted.  Which is just more proof of how fake your outrage is.

Thats because he said the WH wouldn’t be touched when he first talked about this. This is a story because of his bullshit and doing whatever he likes. Then he acts like a chump when he’s asked about it.

[seafoam1 3,384]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

Link?

 

[jonnyutah 526]

5 hours ago, Ron_Artest said:

It is symbolic watching him literally destroy the white house.

Also no surprise the trump cucks are here defending everything he does.

He did lie, but he always lies.  This didn't go for any kind of architectural or historical review.

He doesn't respect the country or it's history.  First the rose garden paving over, then the car lot flags, now the destruction of the east wing and the construction of a football field sized ballroom fitting for a man with small d problems.

Just so we are clear to establish for firmly held beliefs..what exactly do you think he paved over?

[Ron_Artest 2,127]

12 minutes ago, Strike said:

From the Dems and the media.  All the outrage has been about him touching the WH.  Only in the past day or two has the messaging shifted to the scale and/or the "historical" aspects of the project.  Apparently the original reasoning for outrage didn't resonate so your side pivoted.  Which is just more proof of how fake your outrage is.

This thread was created in Aug.  There is a foxnews article in the first post.

From the article...

This will be just the latest step in a radical architectural overhaul intent on making the 225-year-old executive mansion less redolent of stuffy Washington and more evocative of Mar-a-Lago, his gaudy palace in Palm Beach, Florida.

“But starting now with the paving of the Rose Garden, and coming soon with the construction of a garish ballroom, they will see a physical representation of a low and shameful time. The once graceful executive mansion will be transformed into something tasteless and embarrassing. It will be both awful and fitting.”

Enjoy your L