As I have said before, I think the founders “did the best they could with what they had”.
I do think this group overstepped their bounds when instead of amending The Articles, they chose to replace it entierely.
As it stands, there is little I can think of that I would have included in The Constitution other than the clarification of the meaning of certain phrases and the insertion of a few other things.
I have been trying to add comments to your series with a perspective from common old John Q. Citizen from Georgia.
And I disagree with you on this:
“ratified by conventions of delegates chosen by the people”
as far as Georgia is concerned, those delegates were chosen by their elite cronies and sometimes even self-appointed.
And that whole “We the People...” thing is really stuck in my craw this morning. The Constitution is a (flawed) contract between the feds and the states and has very little to do with “the people”.
If some states screwed it up, it is no reflection on the Constitution.
I read what Pauline Maier had to say in her book, Ratification about GA. The fact the convention met for one day jibes with your view. She writes GA didn't contribute a dime in taxes to the Confederacy over 11 years and rarely sent delegates to Congress. The 26-0 vote perhaps reflected in part, the sad state of the economy. Also, I don't imagine Spanish and Indian attacks and the Constitution's protection of slavery hurt the federalist side.