us history: federalists?
971132
haha im in advanced history \nfederalist favored the constitution\nbasicaly they were the first political party  \nso  c\nbecause they wanted a new constitution
367761
D. Federalists wanted a strong central government. Anti-Federalists wanted the individual states to have more power than the national government. The Constitution was very pro-federal government. Try reading the Federalist Papers (dry, sure, but fascinating if you take the time). Also check out the History Channel's show "10 Days that Unexpected Changed America" - the episode about Shay's Rebellion.\n\nMoseschung - good answer, except slavery DID concern them long before the Civil War. I'm reading Alexander Hamilton's biography by Ron Chernow, and slavery was a major sticking point between factions from the very beginning of this country.
827242
It was the federalists at first because they supported a strong central government.  Even George Washington had federalist views.  The anti-federalists, later known as the first republican party(not associated with GOP) gave oppostion because they said federalists were too much like the British.  They weren't a party until later on though.  They both gave great value I believe.  To me they both did good for our country because they both wanted sovereignty and to be independent but just thought of different ways to have it.
896076
you should be able to do a search on that pretty easily. I think the anti feds wanted a government like they had in britain. with kings and such so the constitution was against thier plan. it's like modern day socialist in america. everyone wants to be a socialist if they are the ones making the rules and determining pay, nobody wants to be at the bottom but when you feel you have a chance to be at the top you might push a little harder to rule others
787544
the question of "States rights" was one of the divisive issues facing this nation at that time. which one should be supreme, the States or the Federal government. the Whigs were AWOL on that issue, truth be told. the Republican Party was actually founded on a States rights platform
265485
The Founding Fathers, in contrast to what is commonly believed, where not particularly religious men.  Washington, but most especially Jefferson, Madison, and Franklin, were subscribers to the contemporaneous French Existentialists, who were what we would consider rational humanists...They believed in the Rights of Man being fundamental, and that each citizen (defined much like it was by the Greeks-free white men) should have some power to effect the government.  Washington was not a major philosophical player in the formation of the country-he had almost no influence over the constitution or design of the government, but was hugely respected for his honor and leadership (part of that leadership was to allow other, more qualified men, to design the governmental system). However, the greatest risk that these highly educated and successful men saw in democracy was that the "unwashed masses" could be easily swayed by charismatic leaders, and had questionable moral fibres.  Thus, they thought that the uneducated populace, which constituted the majority of voters, would only be as moral and ethical as the strength of their religious beliefs (the founding fathers saw themselves as being educated and strong enough to not need this kind of influence).  Thus, they strongly stressed to need for beleif in God, not because this was particularly important to themselves, but because they saw it as a stabilizing, positive influence on the poor and uneducated.  It should be noted that this fear, that giving power to poor, uneducated, volatile people would lead to anarchy and the worst kind of mass hysteria, was the reason most of Europe was terrified of this new form of government.  Even France, which was the originator of most of the ideas used for writing the constitution, waited until it was clear the system could work in the US before they tried it.  Its also interesting to note that the worst fears of Europe, that uneducated class power would lead to unspeakable horror, actually came true in France with the overthrow of King Louis XVI.  It also came true in Russia a century later.  So perhaps the founding fathers were right, the strong influence of religion may have tempered the early Americans worst impulses.
16385
This site seems to be fair, critisizing both the local (Democrat) & federal (Republican) government.  It also helps dispell some myths.
1176899
We Americans have always been a pragmatic people.  it's part of our nature, and it is no accident that Benjamin Franklin is often considered the prototype of the typical American.   Our Constitiution was set up with pragmatism in mind:  the entire system of checks and balances was based on the understanding and expectation that people who were in office would not always be noble and good.  By letting each branch of government put limits on the excesses of the others, the framers allowed us to find a way past the dangers of those who would abuse their powers.\n\nSearching for Truth (especially with the capital T, as you wrote it) has always been considered to be pretty much pie-in-the-sky stuff.  And it is to our credit as a people, I think, that we have historically believed that we are better off in what is called the "marketplace of ideas."  In other words, everyone gets his or her own say.  We allow all kinds of viewpoints, no matter how nutty they may sound, especially at first, and ultimately the best, most sensible ideas are the ones that prevail.  That's why we have multiple political parties, and it is why we have free speech and a free press.  \n\n"Behold the mighty oak  It was once just a little nut, but it held its ground."
218246
Oh, definately the states had power. They were just working out that national stuff at the time of the articles of confederation.
73781
try the federalist papers, and the constitution of the United States
919901
It has very much to do with how the United States was formed - from small units to a larger country instead of the conventional way where a nation is split into multiple provinces. This division of a nation into a central and local government is known as FEDERALISM.\n\nTake China for example, which uses provinces. The nation was united under emperor Qin Shi Huang and divided into multiple provinces, in order to more efficiently govern the nation. Here, the central government did the dividing, and hence kept as much power as possible to themselves.\n\nIn contrast, the United States (the name itself is suggestive) upon its formation consisted of 13 colonies, which united under a common cause to achieve independence. None of these states wanted to give up their power, contributing to the failure of the first union under the Articles of Confederation.\n\nThis was finally solved under the Constitution, which we continue to live under today. The basic model, however, persists, where the states have their own sphere of power that the central government (often misleadingly called the "federal government") cannot infringe upon. This does not exist under the province system where the central government is supreme in all matters.
826035
I believe the Anti-Federalist had the Bill of Rights puts in and then it was pretty much supported with some opposition.
752913
The Democratic-Republicans (anti-Federalists) believed in State's Rights.  They had the better view.
1099627
For starters, write in plain English, without substituting numbers for letters and using proper grammar. If you ask me, you should know what to write about the Federalist papers if you're in AP US History, but maybe I'm just fooling myself. 2 pages seems like a bit much for such a short letter.\n\nIf you don't have it already, there's a text for these papers at http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed10.htm\n\nWhat is this project? A summary? An analysis? If it's a summary, then you have your work cut out for you. Summarize each paragraph, as easy as that. If you're doing an analysis, think of what factors might have caused Madison to publish this paper and why he wrote what he did. Try to gauge the impact that the papers had on society and the atmosphere of the time.\n\nAnd use Wikipedia. Like mad.
799951
Federalist ->Sovereignty\nAnti-federalist ->Independence
762324
George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin and James Madison were Liberals. John Adams was a Conservative.
30286
Federalist Papers, by Madison and Jay\nTwo Treaties of Government by John Locke