Final answer:
In post-revolutionary America, a strong executive was feared for its potential to become tyrannical. Thus, early state constitutions and federalist discourse emphasized limited executive power and established the Electoral College as a safeguard.
Step-by-step explanation:
The reluctance to establish a strong executive branch after the American Revolution was rooted in a fear of tyranny reminiscent of British rule. The Founding Fathers were wary of any concentration of power that might resemble a monarchy or authoritarian regime. Early state constitutions often reflected this concern by significantly limiting the powers of governors to prevent any single person from becoming too powerful. This was evident in Thomas Jefferson's draft of the Virginia Constitution, which restricted executive powers extensively.
Americans at the time viewed the legislative branch as the bastion of liberty. This left the executive branch to bear the stigma of potential tyranny, especially considering prior grievances against royal executive authority. Such concerns were also expressed in the Federalist Papers, where figures like Alexander Hamilton sought to reassure that mechanisms such as the Electoral College would prevent the rise of a tyrant as president. The electoral system was designed so that electors, rather a direct popular vote, would choose the president, serving as a buffer against the potential for popular demagoguery to lead to tyranny.