- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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 7:24 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Posted on 10/24/25 at 7:24 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
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 permanence and scale were just a LITTLE different.
Obama spent 367 million on White House renovations. It was done
using taxpayer money
Did you pitch a hissy fit then?
1
Posted on 10/24/25 at 7:37 pm to SlidellCajun
quote:
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.
If being conservative means telling people they can’t build things with private funds then I’m out.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 7:47 pm to dgnx6
quote:
If being conservative means telling people they can’t build things with private funds then I’m out.
Any costs covered by private funds will have strings attached. Even worse
Posted on 10/24/25 at 7:50 pm to SlidellCajun
Spending $300M on an addition is wild but I don’t have a strong enough opinion on whether it was needed or not.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 8:04 pm to bamadontcare
quote:No, Congress did so. You really should consider looking beyond internet memes when forming your opinions regarding world events.
Obama spent 367 million on White House renovations
Late during the Bush-43 administration, Congress authorized funds to address numerous, serious infrastructure problems at the White House. Failing HVAC. Electrical problems. Etcetera. Remediation of those problems occurred during the Obama administration. It is important to note that these were NOT aesthetic issues (changing the curtains) or "nice to have" issues (like a ballroom). They were issues which interfered with the ability of the White House complex to fulfill its roll as headquarters of the Executive Branch.
So, no, I did not have a problem with those expenditures. It is difficult for me to envision that any American with a functioning cerebrum would have a problem with those expenditures, since they were (1) clearly necessary rather than optional, (2) Initiated by one party's administration, (3) authorized by Congress on a bipartisan basis, and (4) completed by the other party's administration.
As I have said, I agree with Trump regarding the need for a ballroom-type facility, and I have only very limited concerns regarding the source of the funding. I just wish he had gone through normal channels for an aesthetic and historical review.
If you see that as a "hissy fit," I can only conclude that you are one of those "special" people who takes personal affront from even the slightest questions regarding dear Trump and his actions.
I recommend that you take a deep breath and try to broaden your horizons a bit.
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 8:06 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 8:15 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
If you see that as a "hissy fit," I can only conclude that you are one of those "special" people who takes personal affront from even the slightest questions regarding dear Trump and his actions
Why are you pitching a hissy fit now when no taxpayer dollars are being used?
It seems like you may not like Trump
Posted on 10/24/25 at 8:21 pm to bamadontcare
My angry little friend, I am still trying to understand where you see a "hissy fit."
I agree with adding a ballroom.
I have no significant problems with the funding.
I wish Trump had followed longstanding norms for approving modifications to national landmarks.
You are making this something that it is not. You are not being remotely rational.
I agree with adding a ballroom.
I have no significant problems with the funding.
I wish Trump had followed longstanding norms for approving modifications to national landmarks.
You are making this something that it is not. You are not being remotely rational.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 8:23 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
You are making this something that it is not. You are not being remotely rational.
You are angry. I’m very calm.
You hate Trump.
You are irrational.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 8:28 pm to bamadontcare
quote:Whatever you say, amigo. Have a nice evening and get a good night's sleep. It appears that you need it rather badly.
You are angry. I’m very calm.
You hate Trump.
You are irrational.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 8:33 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
Whatever you say, amigo. Have a nice evening and get a good night's sleep. It appears that you need it rather badly.
You sound pissed. Go cry to your boyfriend.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 8:56 pm to IMSA_Fan
It needs to be big to fit more people for bribes
Posted on 10/24/25 at 8:57 pm to IMSA_Fan
Nothing says drain the swamp more than building a giant room for fund raising (bribes)
Posted on 10/24/25 at 9:59 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
An executive mansion is the same thing as a palace except there are no monarchs residing there. It's the same thing for all intents and purposes.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 10:05 pm to IMSA_Fan
The amount of people who are sky screaming about this is alarming. I'm not trying to be funny or anything.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 10:12 pm to Barstools
quote:One last thought before bed.
An executive mansion is the same thing as a palace except there are no monarchs residing there. It's the same thing for all intents and purposes.
By the late 18th century, the palace of almost every reigning European monarch had a ballroom or similar space, yet our Executive Mansion was designed without one.
Why? (rhetorical question)
Posted on 10/24/25 at 10:24 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
By the late 18th century, the palace of almost every reigning European monarch had a ballroom or similar space, yet our Executive Mansion was designed without one.
Why? (rhetorical question)
By the late 18th century, the campus of every major European University had a ballroom or similar space.
Now, Trump is putting one in our Executive Mansion.
Why did I choose this framing? (rhetorical question)
Posted on 10/24/25 at 10:32 pm to IMSA_Fan
Tacky. Shouldn’t have been allowed.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 10:33 pm to Smeg
O'Vomit had to hold a State Dinner in a tent. Yes we need a grand ballroom.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 10:42 pm to Smeg
It has to be big enough to hold the DJT balls. Thank you for your attention to this mstter!
Posted on 10/24/25 at 11:12 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
As I have said, I agree with Trump regarding the need for a ballroom-type facility, and I have only very limited concerns regarding the source of the funding. I just wish he had gone through normal channels for an aesthetic and historical review.
very reasonable. the t-shirt magas are going to melt regardless of valid points like this
Page 12 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News