Answer:
As a delegate to the Philadelphia Convention, I would have supported the adoption of the new Constitution. There were several reasons why I believed that the new Constitution was necessary and would be beneficial for the country.
First and foremost, the Articles of Confederation were simply not effective at governing the country. The Articles gave too much power to the states and not enough to the federal government, which made it difficult to address important national issues such as trade, foreign affairs, and military defense. The lack of a strong central government meant that the country was vulnerable to external threats and unable to effectively address the many challenges it faced.
In contrast, the new Constitution proposed a stronger federal government that would have more power to address these issues. It created a system of checks and balances that would prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful, and it established a system of federal courts that would help to ensure that the laws were uniformly applied throughout the country. These and other provisions of the Constitution would have provided the stability and security that the country needed to thrive.
Another reason I would have supported the new Constitution is that it provided a greater level of representation for the people. Under the Articles of Confederation, each state had one vote in Congress, regardless of its size or population. This meant that smaller states had the same level of influence as larger ones, which was not necessarily fair or democratic. The new Constitution, on the other hand, established a system of representation based on population, which meant that larger states would have more influence in Congress. This would have better reflected the will of the people and ensured that the government was more responsive to the needs of the majority.
In conclusion, there were many good reasons why I would have supported the adoption of the new Constitution. Its provisions for a stronger federal government and a more representative democracy would have been beneficial for the country, and it was clear to me that the Articles of Confederation were simply not up to the task of governing the nation. I believe that the new Constitution was a necessary step forward and would have provided the stability and security that the country needed to thrive.