White House Adds Partisan Plaques to Biden and Obama Portraits

By Brian Allen

The White House has installed new plaques beneath the official portraits of former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama that sharply criticize their records, transforming a traditionally nonpartisan historical display into an overt political statement.

According to reporting by The Independent, the plaques characterize Biden as “the worst President in American history” and describe Obama as a “divisive” figure, language that closely mirrors President Trump’s own political rhetoric.

The move represents a notable departure from long-standing White House practice and raises broader questions about how institutional spaces are being used to project partisan narratives.

What was changed

The plaques were added beneath portraits displayed along what the administration refers to as a “Presidential Walk of Fame” near the West Wing colonnade. Rather than offering neutral summaries of each president’s tenure, several of the new plaques present sharply opinionated assessments.

Biden’s plaque goes beyond policy critique. It repeats Trump’s false claim that the 2020 election was corrupt and replaces Biden’s portrait with an image of an autopen, referencing Republican assertions that Biden’s aides exercised undue control during his presidency.

Obama’s plaque frames his administration primarily through criticism of the Affordable Care Act and labels him one of the nation’s most polarizing political figures, emphasizing partisan outcomes rather than historical context or legislative impact.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the plaques, calling them “eloquently written descriptions” and stating that many were written “directly by the President himself.”

Why this is unusual

Presidential portraits and accompanying text inside the White House have historically been treated as institutional artifacts. Even presidents whose terms were controversial are typically described in restrained, factual language, with value judgments left to historians rather than sitting administrations.

What distinguishes this episode is not criticism alone, but where and how it is delivered. The plaques are mounted inside the White House itself, lending the authority of the office to what are effectively partisan assessments.

This is not campaign messaging or external commentary. It is the executive branch using an official government space to render judgments on its predecessors.

Selective framing

The partisan nature of the plaques becomes clearer when viewed in comparison with how other presidents are presented.

According to The Independent, presidents more closely aligned with Trump receive favorable or forgiving portrayals. Ronald Reagan’s plaque emphasizes popularity and Cold War leadership. Richard Nixon’s highlights his electoral success and political comeback. Gerald Ford is praised for issuing a “brave” pardon to Nixon.

By contrast, Biden, Obama, Jimmy Carter, and George W. Bush are framed largely through failure, division, or blame. Even Bill Clinton’s plaque references Hillary Clinton’s 2016 electoral loss rather than his own presidency.

The result is not a comprehensive historical overview, but a curated narrative shaped by current political loyalties.

What this signals

The decision to embed partisan language into White House historical displays aligns with a broader pattern in the Trump administration: using institutional authority to reinforce personal and political grievances.

Unlike social media posts or campaign speeches, these plaques carry the weight of official presentation. They signal that the administration views control over historical interpretation as an extension of executive power.

Importantly, the White House has not attempted to downplay this intent. The plaques have been publicly defended, not disavowed.

Why it matters

The presidency is not only a governing office but a custodian of national memory. When historical displays inside the White House are turned into vehicles for partisan judgment, the boundary between governance and political combat erodes.

If each administration revises the historical record of its predecessors within the White House itself, institutional continuity gives way to perpetual narrative warfare. Over time, that risks reducing shared civic history to a series of competing political scorecards.

Bottom line

The addition of partisan plaques beneath the portraits of Joe Biden and Barack Obama is not a minor decor change. It is a deliberate choice to project political judgment through an institutional setting traditionally reserved for neutral historical reflection.

Whether future administrations reverse or replicate this approach will determine whether the White House remains a steward of shared history or becomes another arena for partisan redefinition.