Yeah, undoing a bad thing is the same as doing a bad thing in the first place, good point.
Which just encourages them to do more of the same whenever they get the chance, since they’ll know that whatever damage they do will remain deliberately unfixed in the name of avoiding looking “partisan”.
This pseudo-moralistic “hold the high ground” nonsense has done nothing but let the Republicans do massive, irreparable damage to the nation. The Democrats need to stop being nonpartisan or bipartisan - which in practice is just another way of saying “surrender to the Republicans and worship them” - and treat everything the Republicans do as the act of an implacable, rabidly destructive enemy - because it is.
So yes, level the ballroom, and openly admit it’s because of a desire to undo everything Trump has done.
He needs a squad of US Marshals following him around to keep him from stealing stuff.
I think that if you create a situation where both sides are wasting money on unauthorized spiffing up of their government housing, swing voters are going to prefer the genuine authoritarians rather than the lawbreaking-light Democrats.
This assumes that congress won’t appropriate money to restore the East Wing. If they do, fine, the president should get out of the way and then quietly sign the bill. But there are a bunch of reasons to suspect congress will not pass the needed spending, and then the Democratic president has to respect the law.
Renaming stuff Trump named after confederates is needed and different, because it doesn’t cost much and, AFAIK, won’t require legislation, and isn’t as self-serving as fixing up the president’s mansion. But you don’t want it to look like the focus of a Democratic administration is on symbolic stuff like this. It has to look like the day one priority is the economy. (Although the actual day one priority has to be re-election, because every MAGA administration will be worse than the last one.)
I’m just not sure people will think of it that way, and it would be hard to spin it that way. If you say “this was an illegal action by Trump and we are undoing it” then it reads like following the law, not breaking it.
I don’t at all think that not taking advantage of the additional powers Trump carved out for the president is wise, because it leaves those structures in place for the next Trump. Once the executive executes a power grab, they at least need to use those powers to undo that power grab. Not doing so is part of why Trump was able to do so much worse this time around.
I also don’t think most people think of the White House as “the president’s mansion.” That’s the whole issue with how Trump is acting. It’s a historic building where the President temporarily resides, and that building belongs to the people.
I could maybe see asking the people what they want to do with the ballroom. Maybe that would get that idea back across.
Was it illegal? SCOTUS does not think so.
But he does, it’s just not a big templesque building or tall obelisk.
There is one placed earlier on the 20th anniversary of his death (1965) that, following his wishes, was a plain stone block no larger that a desk in front of the National Archives with simply, In memory of engraved on it.
Having said that, naming the ballroom after him, assuming it doesn’t get razed because of its shoddy construction, would be marvelous, pissing off many more Republicans than Trump.
Of course if it was a memorial to Trump, following his wishes it would have to be an enormous statue of him, so enormous that it would be the tallest structure in Washington, gilded in gold paint, with no taller structure allowed to be constructed within 100 miles.
When we’re finally rid of this insane asshole, whatever state of construction the “ballroom” is in should be carefully inspected and decisions about demolition or re-purposing made accordingly.
But the absolute first priority should be the White House, and specifically the Oval Office. I just saw a routine press picture of His Orangeness, and he’s turned it into the kind of comically tacky, tasteless trash that resembles one of his own residences. Americans should be really ashamed that foreign leaders go in there and that this is their impression of American values. For this reason, even if no other, any of Trump’s vanity projects that are ever built have to be either torn down or sensibly and tastefully modified.
Or more likely, if the Democrats don’t they’ll favor the “strong” Republicans over the “weak” Democrats. After all, look which party is actually getting to do what they want.
“They go low we go high” doesn’t work.
I’m hoping that Trump’s successor, whoever it is, walks into the Oval Office on Day One, carrying a crowbar, and proceeds to pry all that ugly gold crap off the walls. In full view of the cameras, naturally.
Oh yes.
And I suspect the ballroom won’t be anything more than a hole in the ground. I would erect a ‘In Memory of Donald Trump. We will never forget you’ in front of that.
For those in favour of leaving things as he’s made them, I have a question. One of his early acts once in office concerned Arlington Cemetery. Near the entry there is a large sign indicating where prominent heroes and war generals, etc, are buried.
One of his first acts was to remove every black person and woman off that sign.
You going to leave that too? Because a President did it? Because it would look petty to change it back?
I meant:
Saying we are undoing would be Democratic Party spin for a project that costs hundreds of millions of dollars.
As I said, if Congress funds, fine. But a Democratic president should not be getting out in front of a big construction project to fix up the White House until MAGA is pretty clearly gone for good.
MAGA wants rule forever without free and fair elections generally, and certainly not in 2028. Regardless of whether the Democrats win in November 2028 by the normal criteria for winning, Trump will order Vance to insist that the GOP won, and find a way to enforce that. But this thread is premised on the pleasing-to-me idea that MAGA failed in what may be the most important part of their authoritarian project – breaking not just democratic norms, but electoral democracy.
Maybe I am not understanding what the thread title means by “have the guts.” Are we talking about have the guts to send a proposed restore-the-East-Wing bill text to Congress? And then accepting it when Congress turns out to have other priorities, perhaps because the GOP then controls House or Senate? Or are we talking about spending unappropriated funds?
If the answer to the last question is yes, what about national health insurance? Should we spend unappropriated funds on stuff that actually helps Americans like that, or just on D.C. construction?
You of course do not have to answer these questions. I probably would not like to be questioned myself, But if you do not feel this is a misguided question, are we talking about having the guts to propose a possibly unpopular bill, or having the guts to break the law?
Appropriately, it would match Kliban’s Nixon Monument.
For a Trump version the people would have to be depicted from the back only, because presumably they would be partially undressed so as to be able to eliminate bodily wastes.
A willingness to do something other than their usual routine of desperate and futile groveling to the Republicans in hopes of approval from their lords and masters. In the more usual run of things the Democrats would leave everything Trump did untouched in the name of “bipartisanship”, and focus their efforts on making sure Trump avoids any consequences for his actions.
And there’s also Roosevelt Campobello International Park in New Brunswick, Canada.
Oh, I’m sure they’re still going to do that part.