Short answer: The Anti-Federalists were not simply a group that wanted presidential elections decided only by a national popular vote. They were critics of the proposed U.S. Constitution, and they held a range of views.
Who were the Anti-Federalists?
In 1787–1788, the Constitution’s supporters—called Federalists—argued for ratifying the new Constitution. Their opponents became known as Anti-Federalists. They worried that the national government would become too powerful and that ordinary people’s rights and local communities would not be protected. Their essays and speeches are often collected under the name The Anti-Federalist Papers.
What did they think about choosing the president?
The Constitution created the Electoral College: voters in each state choose electors, and those electors formally choose the president. Some Anti-Federalists criticized this plan because they thought it was complicated, indirect, or gave too much influence to political elites. But Anti-Federalists did not all propose the same alternative. Some favored more direct popular participation; others focused on different concerns about presidential power and the national government.
So it is too broad to say that the Anti-Federalists only wanted a national popular vote and opposed the Electoral College. The more accurate point is that some objected to the Constitution’s indirect election system, while the movement as a whole had varied arguments and proposals.
One helpful distinction
- National popular vote: The candidate who receives the most votes across the entire country wins.
- Electoral College: Each state has a number of electors, and those electors cast votes for president under rules set by the Constitution and state law.
These are different ways to choose a president, but the Anti-Federalists were not a single-issue group focused only on that question.