In Hamilton's original idea of a consolidated national government the States would have been nothing more than administrative regions, not sovereign States that were members of a Federal compact. After 'nationalist' or 'consolidationist' plans like his were rejected, he supported the 'Federal' plan. But you already know this, it's been posted to you complete with hamilton's own explanations many times.
Madison NEVER considered the federal Union as "the States' agent" and carefully constructed the constitution to prevent that from ever happening...
LOL. With all due respect, you're becoming a caricature of your own caricature as you go in circles with your rant.
That is why state legislatures were not allowed to ratify the Constitution which WAS/IS the agent of the American People.
The legislatures were not to be the ratifiers because that would have made ratification a legislative decision. Here is what Madison said regarding the process of ratification:
"It must result from the unanimous assent of the several States that are parties to it, differing no other wise from their ordinary assent than in its being expressed, not by the legislative authority, but by that of the people themselves." - James Madison, Federalist Papers # 39
That's why conventions were called and delegates chosen for the purpose.
While the powers granted the Union are limited they are still vast and the constitution was designed to limit the powers of the STATES primarily by increasing the powers of the federal government.
The federal government ONLY had power in regards to the few powers that were granted to it in limited areas. It was not to act outside those areas.
WHY ELSE WOULD THE ANTIS OPPOSE IT?
If you'd bother to read the essays you wouldn't have to ask that question, nor would you repeatedly display such a shocking lack of knowledge regarding Constitutional principles and the Founding Fathers. To answer your question, some of them didn't really want a central government of any kind, and some of them were afraid that if even a small and limited one were created, deceitful and evil men would miscontrue it until it grew into a leviathon of empirical oppression.
Inability to understand negoitiating and compromising prevents you from understanding what happened at the convention.
LOL. I really don't think you should be the one to discuss anyone else's lack of understanding regarding the convention. This thread is a testimony to your ignorance.
Hopefully, you won't have to negoitiate anything with one knowledgeable in such things or you will be left standing saying "How did I lose my pants?"
I seem to have an extra pair here...I wonder who's they were...