Media keeps reporting that the new WH Ballroom will address some of the security issues that are now evident. Definitely minimize risk. And, I think it has been a needed amenity. I think it will be great. Also, love that it's being built without taxpayer money.

However, since the WHCD, I have not been able to reconcile the attendance numbers.

I have seen estimates that the new ballroom will seat from 600 to 1000 for dinner. Yet, there were more than 2,000 attendees at the Hilton ballroom.

So, what gives? Just cut invitations in half?

Yes.

As I understand it ballroom will have a capacity of around 650 to 700 seated guests, or 1000 including standing guests. That's significantly larger than the current East Room, which typically accommodates about 200-250 for formal seated events, like the one they just had for the UK Royals. The WHCD may have to just trim down the guest list the normal 2500-2600 attendees.

Of course it's never been a security risk in the past, however if you remember during a 2009 state dinner hosted by Obama, Tareq Salahi and Michaele Schon managed to enter without invitations. So claiming that the White House is the most secure place is up for debate

It may be a security risk in that, up to now, the President had to leave the WH for any dinner or event larger than what could fit in the dining area. The ballroom increases the capacity of the WH to host events, meaning that the President can stay there protected by all of the emplaced security.

Going out to a hotel ballroom is, by definition, a high security risk.

An L of an Ag said:

---

I voted for him THREE times and I'm STILL waiting for MY invitation!

---

In the same election?!

Zapata23 said:

---

As I understand it ballroom will have a capacity of around 650 to 700 seated guests, or 1000 including standing guests. That's significantly larger than the current East Room, which typically accommodates about 200-250 for formal seated events, like the one they just had for the UK Royals. The WHCD may have to just trim down the guest list the normal 2500-2600 attendees.

Of course it's never been a security risk in the past, however if you remember during a 2009 state dinner hosted by Obama, Tareq Salahi and Michaele Schon managed to enter without invitations. So claiming that the White House is the most secure place is up for debate

---

Just have Ballroom One for the most important guests. Overflow in the East Room.

It's not being built for the WHCD. It's more for formal visiting heads of state. So WHCD can just cut the invites down or not expect a president to attend. Easy.

Zapata23 said:

---

As I understand it ballroom will have a capacity of around 650 to 700 seated guests, or 1000 including standing guests. That's significantly larger than the current East Room, which typically accommodates about 200-250 for formal seated events, like the one they just had for the UK Royals. The WHCD may have to just trim down the guest list the normal 2500-2600 attendees.

Of course it's never been a security risk in the past, however if you remember during a 2009 state dinner hosted by Obama, Tareq Salahi and Michaele Schon managed to enter without invitations. So claiming that the White House is the most secure place is up for debate

---

They were listing the attendees to the WHCD this year. 2/3 of them had nothing to do with the "press". By my estimate you could cut the 6000 to 2000 of which there are 1000 plus ones.

This is a beautiful ballroom and plan.

Secret service might possibly demand that the rest of the hotel be vacated or locked down more tightly when POTUS is on property.

The EW Ball room is certainly needed. It's 2026, we should not be hosting state dinners in tents or temporary facilities.

Regardless, I don't think the problem not the solution is a pure black and white. It will be in the gray

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Secret service might possibly demand that the rest of the hotel be vacated or locked down more tightly when POTUS is on property.

The EW Ball room is certainly needed. It's 2026, we should not be hosting state dinners in tents or temporary facilities.

Regardless, I don't think the problem not the solution is a pure black and white. It will be in the gray

---

That's a real good way to make every hotel reject any event with the president on premises. Unless the government buys out the hotel.

waitwhat? said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Secret service might possibly demand that the rest of the hotel be vacated or locked down more tightly when POTUS is on property.

The EW Ball room is certainly needed. It's 2026, we should not be hosting state dinners in tents or temporary facilities.

Regardless, I don't think the problem not the solution is a pure black and white. It will be in the gray

---

That's a real good way to make every hotel reject any event with the president on premises. Unless the government buys out the hotel.

---

So? Who cares if the hotel says no then to the event?

Or post agents and checkouts at ever elevator and stair. Guests leaving their floors to the common spaces will be searched.

There are ways to do it safely. I didn't say the m it would be convenient for everyone.

Only allow real journalists.

Capacity problem solved.

What's funny is it won't be done until Trump is almost out of office. It's not like he's going to even get to enjoy it as POTUS. It's because he spearheaded the effort that drives their angst. It's so stupid.

aggiehawg said:

---

Zapata23 said:

---

As I understand it ballroom will have a capacity of around 650 to 700 seated guests, or 1000 including standing guests. That's significantly larger than the current East Room, which typically accommodates about 200-250 for formal seated events, like the one they just had for the UK Royals. The WHCD may have to just trim down the guest list the normal 2500-2600 attendees.

Of course it's never been a security risk in the past, however if you remember during a 2009 state dinner hosted by Obama, Tareq Salahi and Michaele Schon managed to enter without invitations. So claiming that the White House is the most secure place is up for debate

---

Just have Ballroom One for the most important guests. Overflow in the East Room.

---

Kids' table?

Another event space is the National Building Museum.

aggiehawg said:

---

Zapata23 said:

---

As I understand it ballroom will have a capacity of around 650 to 700 seated guests, or 1000 including standing guests. That's significantly larger than the current East Room, which typically accommodates about 200-250 for formal seated events, like the one they just had for the UK Royals. The WHCD may have to just trim down the guest list the normal 2500-2600 attendees.

Of course it's never been a security risk in the past, however if you remember during a 2009 state dinner hosted by Obama, Tareq Salahi and Michaele Schon managed to enter without invitations. So claiming that the White House is the most secure place is up for debate

---

Just have Ballroom One for the most important guests. Overflow in the East Room.

---

Overflow in the East Room is not going to happen.

Ag87H2O said:

---

For all the bit***** and moaning on the left about the ballroom addition, it's clear Trump was right again.

He has a knack for being ahead of them on what needs to happen and making them look petty and dumb when reality and facts on the ground end up proving him right.

---

As long as he doesn't use my money for it, no issues here. I wouldn't give him a red cent of my money for this effort though. Already pay for what is supposed to be exceptional security.

KingofHazor said:

---

It may be a security risk in that, up to now, the President had to leave the WH for any dinner or event larger than what could fit in the dining area. The ballroom increases the capacity of the WH to host events, meaning that the President can stay there protected by all of the emplaced security.

Going out to a hotel ballroom is, by definition, a high security risk.

---

Which is part of the job and a necessary "risk".

Despite what some on here seem to think, the president is just a man, and our employee at that.

bobbranco said:

---

Another event space is the National Building Museum.

---

Love that building. It's gorgeous.

bobbranco said:

---

Another event space is the National Building Museum.

---

Which is over in a lovely part of DC near Chinatown and H Street, just try not to walk thru all the clouds of weed as you stand in line there to get thru security

Captain Pablo said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Zapata23 said:

---

As I understand it ballroom will have a capacity of around 650 to 700 seated guests, or 1000 including standing guests. That's significantly larger than the current East Room, which typically accommodates about 200-250 for formal seated events, like the one they just had for the UK Royals. The WHCD may have to just trim down the guest list the normal 2500-2600 attendees.

Of course it's never been a security risk in the past, however if you remember during a 2009 state dinner hosted by Obama, Tareq Salahi and Michaele Schon managed to enter without invitations. So claiming that the White House is the most secure place is up for debate

---

Just have Ballroom One for the most important guests. Overflow in the East Room.

---

Kids' table?

---

How many inauguration balls are held in different locations? Not a new concept..

Do all these things via Zoom calls. Much safer.

aggiehawg said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Zapata23 said:

---

As I understand it ballroom will have a capacity of around 650 to 700 seated guests, or 1000 including standing guests. That's significantly larger than the current East Room, which typically accommodates about 200-250 for formal seated events, like the one they just had for the UK Royals. The WHCD may have to just trim down the guest list the normal 2500-2600 attendees.

Of course it's never been a security risk in the past, however if you remember during a 2009 state dinner hosted by Obama, Tareq Salahi and Michaele Schon managed to enter without invitations. So claiming that the White House is the most secure place is up for debate

---

Just have Ballroom One for the most important guests. Overflow in the East Room.

---

Kids' table?

---

How many inauguration balls are held in different locations? Not a new concept..

---

Heck yeah

Put the Western euro heads of state in the college park elk's lodge where they belong

JDUB08AG said:

---

What's funny is it won't be done until Trump is almost out of office. It's not like he's going to even get to enjoy it as POTUS. It's because he spearheaded the effort that drives their angst. It's so stupid.

---

And every Democrat that is currently screaming about the ballroom will show up with bells on at the very first event they are invited to there...

I am an advocate for a larger, on-site entertaining space at the White House, but I don't see it as being a replacement for large events like the WHCD, not only because of capacity, but also because the WHCD is a private event, put on by a private organization. The president of the WH Correspondents Association even came out and questioned how such an arrangement would work and if it essentially creates a space at the WH that can be rented out for certain private events. Does it become the Clinton Lincoln Bedroom brouhaha on a larger scale?

JDUB08AG said:

---

What's funny is it won't be done until Trump is almost out of office. It's not like he's going to even get to enjoy it as POTUS. It's because he spearheaded the effort that drives their angst. It's so stupid.

---

It is because he leveled the east wing without permission, public planning, or explanation. It isn't his house. It is the people's house.

Then donors were going to pay for it.

Then tax payers are going to pay for it.

While tax payers are also experiencing an incredible increase in expenses, and also paying for a not-war.

And he is so worried about his safety he goes to Maralago practically weekly. Also on tax payer's dime.

It is very "let them eat cake".

People are genuinely suffering and he can't shut up about black granite.

Max Stonetrail said:

---

Only allow real journalists.

Capacity problem solved.

---

If they only allowed real journalists, couldn't they do this at a Waffle House?

It's Trump's idea so it has to be bad.

Ag98and03 said:

---

JDUB08AG said:

---

What's funny is it won't be done until Trump is almost out of office. It's not like he's going to even get to enjoy it as POTUS. It's because he spearheaded the effort that drives their angst. It's so stupid.

---

It is because he leveled the east wing without permission, public planning, or explanation. It isn't his house. It is the people's house.

Then donors were going to pay for it.

Then tax payers are going to pay for it.

While tax payers are also experiencing an incredible increase in expenses, and also paying for a not-war.

And he is so worried about his safety he goes to Maralago practically weekly. Also on tax payer's dime.

It is very "let them eat cake".

---

He's actually safer at Mar a lago than the WH, fwiw. And AF1 and 2 trips to Key Largo, Vail, Marthas Vinyard, Hawaii etc. used to be de facto normal for the Potus/VP. The whining never stops from some quarters.

What part of the ball room (not the secure facility beneath it) are taxpayers paying for? What permission was lacking which previous WH changes such as Obama's basketball court received?

13B said:

---

IIIHorn said:

---

An L of an Ag said:

---

I voted for him THREE times and I'm STILL waiting for MY invitation!

---

In the same election?!

---

No, he's not a Democrat.

---

Doh!

jjdad1111 said:

---

Media keeps reporting that the new WH Ballroom will address some of the security issues that are now evident. Definitely minimize risk. And, I think it has been a needed amenity. I think it will be great. Also, love that it's being built without taxpayer money.

However, since the WHCD, I have not been able to reconcile the attendance numbers.

I have seen estimates that the new ballroom will seat from 600 to 1000 for dinner. Yet, there were more than 2,000 attendees at the Hilton ballroom.

So, what gives? Just cut invitations in half?

---

You need to remember, the White House Correspondents Association is not part of the White House. Their dinner is not a governmental function. The President is an invited guest, not host.

The WH Ballroom is not an appropriate venue for the WHCD. In fact, given the historical division between the press and the WH, I would be surprised if the WHCA would accept holding their dinner there.