As the video explains, the requirement for a "natural born citizen" was to prevent anyone with a reason to have divided loyalties from being President.
A soldier who is a U.S. citizen serving overseas accompanied by his U.S. citizen wife would be able to have children with no presumption of divided loyalties on the part of the children.
A U.S. citizen who is born IN THE U.S. to immigrants who are not U.S. citizens could be expected to have extremely divided loyalties.
geez, that is about as rational as saying that the child that converts to Christianity from any other faith of their parents, could not be a good christian or a minister, eventually raising up to head the national organization of say, Baptists or Catholics.
I believe my brother and I are cases as to your point but we tip the scales of expectancy far away from what your words would seem to establish. My brother killed in the WWII battle for Okinawa and I also served overseas in that war. Both of us were born in the USA of immigrant,not naturalized parents. There was never any doubt that our loyalty was with the USA. However I understand the Founding Fathers who wanted to be assured POTUSA had not the slightest inclination in any way for allegiance wrote the eligibility requirement they did. I am satisfied and pleased to the extent except that the Founders could have been more explicit for future generations.