This is an opinion and only you can answer it. I imagine a teacher has asked this as a writing assignment. It was one of my favorite assignments to see if the students understood what I was teaching.
Federalists were for a strong federal government and didn't think that the Bill of Rights is necessary for the government to run without corruption. Anti-federalists thought that the Constitution didn't properly protect their rights like a Bill of Rights would do. However, in the end the Federalists let the anti-federalists have the Bill of Rights.
The Federalists were the ones whom wanted to aprove the constitution, and make it legal. The Antifederalists were the one whom voted againt aproving the constituition. The Federalists were the ones whom wanted to aprove the constitution, and make it legal. The Antifederalists were the one whom voted againt aproving the constituition.
The common interest of the anti-federalists and federalists was that they both wanted America to be controlled by the people. Their motives were to preserve the liberty and independence of the people.
Antifederalists are the opponents of the constitution.
They were called Federalists.
Yes, because there was a political division between the Federalists and Antifederalists as to whether the Constitution should be passed or not. Federalists supported the Constitution and Antifederalists opposed the Constitution.
the federalists were trying to get the antifederalists with the constitution and the federalists agreed with the constitution and the antifederalists didnt agree with the constitution
The side at opposed the ratificaton of the constition was the Anti- federalists. people who were Anti-federalists such as George Mason and others.
The antifederalists would be appalled at the degree to which power has been transferred to Congress and U.S. Government. I suspect even the federalists would be uneasy.
544
The Federalists supported strong federal/central government, while the antifederalists wanted strong state government.
The federalists supported the constitution but the anti federalists wanted to change/tweak the constitution.
Federalists were for a strong federal government and didn't think that the Bill of Rights is necessary for the government to run without corruption. Anti-federalists thought that the Constitution didn't properly protect their rights like a Bill of Rights would do. However, in the end the Federalists let the anti-federalists have the Bill of Rights.
The founding fathers didn't really insist on a bill of rights, the antifederalists did. Federalists were people who wanted a strong government, but antifederalists were afraid that if there was a very strong government, the states would be too weak, and that people would lose rights if the government was too powerful. So when the federalists wanted to approve the Constitution, antifederalists said they wouldn't, until the federalists put in a Bill of Rights. So the federalists added the bill of rights, so that the anti-feds would ratify the constitution.
The Federalists and Antifederalists both engaged in the debate over the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in the late 18th century. Federalists supported a strong central government to maintain order and unity, advocating for the Constitution as a means to achieve this. In contrast, Antifederalists feared that a powerful federal government would threaten individual liberties and states' rights, arguing for a Bill of Rights to safeguard personal freedoms. Ultimately, while both groups were concerned with governance, they diverged sharply on the balance of power between the federal and state governments.
It began with federalists and antifederalists then federalists integrated to republicans and anti-federalists went to democrats
Federalists And Antifederalists Fought Over The Ratification