The Anti-Federalists were not in favor of ratifying the new Constitution. Some Anti-Federalists wanted to keep the Articles of Confederation, others wanted to add some things and change some things in the new Constitution before agreeing to ratify it. Some very important Anti-Federalists were Patrick Henry, George Mason, and Richard Henry Lee. Anti-Federalists tended to be poorer and lower class than Federalists. These people feared a central government and feared that the government proposed by the new Constitution could easily turn into a tyranny. Federalists argued that the United States needed a strong central government to stand a chance against foreign powers, among other all-beneficial reasons. In 1791, the first 10 amendments were ratified, which became known as the Bill of Rights. These amendments included many of the same rights claimed by the Anti-Federalists, including freedom of speech, press, and religion, and the right to bear arms. Both sides had well thought out arguments as to why a Bill of Rights was or was not needed in the Constitution. Ultimately, they compromised and added the Bill of Rights as the first ten amendments. Overall, I think the Federalists had a better argument regarding US constitutional arrangements. The Federalists truly understood what America needed. If it were not for the federalists our country would be completely different. As for the Anti-Federalists, they had some good points, but the Federalists were able to refute every argument. Without the Federalists and the Constitution, the United States of America might not even have this