What is it about this comment that you do not understand? There are two kinds of citizens.
1. Naturalized or born on US soil to one citizen parent and one non-citizen parent = citizen.
2. Born on US soil to two citizen parents = natural born citizen.
There is a distinction between citizen and natural born citizen.
“There is a distinction between citizen and natural born citizen”
Yes, there is. And it involves recognizing naturalized citizens as seperate from those who were citizens all their lives.
“There are two kinds of citizens.
1. Naturalized or born on US soil to one citizen parent and one non-citizen parent = citizen.
2. Born on US soil to two citizen parents = natural born citizen.”
That dog won’t hunt. Born citizens are not of the same status as naturalized citizens. The citizenship of the naturalized is conditional, whereas soil babies possess citizenship through birthright. That is, it is inalienable. Cannot be taken away from them. The naturalized, contrariwise, have to jump through hoops to gain privileges. The government expects things of them it cannot possibly demand of soil babies.
Therefore, in order to exclude, along with naturalized citizens, soil babies from the presidency, there’d have to be at least three classes of citizenship. Since that’s never been the case, you might wonder why no one’s noticed this phantom third category before. Then you might realize that, perhaps, you were wrong all along. That, after all, the two kinds of citizens that get that way via birth belong in the same category. That naturalized citizens, with whom soil babies had nothing in common, rightly belong on their own.