The National Convention was perhaps the most speculative congregation as of now; the fate of our country is placed in the hands of these delegates, in their formation of the executive office. It is their political philosophy on executive power that will influence this newly formed nation for years to come. However, a great majority of the delegates" debates seem controversial in respects to this new office, and it is momentous that some of these topics be set forth amongst the common people, so that they are able to see what kind of political system is to come. .
One particular controversial topic discussed was how the President of the United States is to be elected. Hamilton proposed that "This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any pre-established body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjecture" (Fed 68). A basic flaw in this proposal is that the person representing us, the people, remain faithful to our political ideologies which also should be a reflection of his own. Why would such a person decide to switch sides, and at the same time commit the biggest act of infidel of all time? In order to answer this question my fellow laymen, it is just to recognize the outlook that the seemingly transcendent Benjamin Franklin lends to us. Ben notes that there are "two passions" that fundamentally dominate a person while running for such an executive office or representational office for that matter. They are the love for money and the love for power. Now, who wouldn't love to have the power of suspending the fate of the people? Let me also say that maybe that this representative is a propagandist, and fools us into believing that he is for one side and in actuality is for the other. In doing this, a certain power is given to that representative; he is able to control the will of the people, paradoxically, even against their own will.