Not trying to discourage new answers here, but there was good answers and discussion in the thread when this was last asked:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1onzgt/why_did_the_us_founding_fathers_not_use_a/

Can I ask a question spurred by the link to the older discussion below?

That discussion says that the founders had wanted a separation of powers, and that parliamentary systems lack that. But they were forming a new government and could have structured it any way they wanted, including some kind of hybrid system with a strong, separate executive and a multi-party parliament. They didn't have to adopt the parliamentary system exactly as the British did it.

Was there any consideration of such a structure?