The Federalists wanted a strong government and strong executive branch, while the anti-Federalists wanted a weaker central government. The Federalists did not want a bill of rights —they thought the new constitution was sufficient. The anti-federalists demanded a bill of rights.

Federalists argued for counterbalancing branches of government. In light of charges that the Constitution created a strong national government, they were able to argue that the separation of powers among the three branches of government protected the rights of the people.

Federalists wanted a strong central government. They believed that a strong central government was necessary if the states were going to band together to form a nation. A strong central government could represent the nation to other countries.

The anti-Federalists agreed to support ratification, with the understanding that they would put forth recommendations for amendments should the document go into effect. The Federalists agreed to support the proposed amendments, specifically a bill of rights.

*They both wanted a type of Republic. *They both tried to compromise with each to minimize political clashes. *They both believed that they were doing what was best for the nation. *They both believed in some form of Government.

A) The Constitution created a stronger federal government. The Constitution protected individual rights through the Bill of Rights. …

While many Democratic-Republicans thought of the war as a “test of the Republic”, Federalists denounced calls for war, with John Randolph advising Madison to abandon the thought of war, as it would threaten United States commerce. As the war continued, New England Federalists maintained their opposition.

Federalists believed in a strong federal republican government led by learned, public-spirited men of property. The Democratic-Republicans, alternatively, feared too much federal government power and focused more on the rural areas of the country, which they thought were underrepresented and underserved.