“They knew that barring the presidency to all except those who were born on American soil, to two US citizen parents, was the strongest insurance they could impose against someone of divided loyalties assuming control of that office.
That is the entire simplicity of the Natural Born Citizen clause.”
Correct. If the intent of the founders was to prevent, to the greatest degree they could, the possibility of divided loyalties (and it certainly was) in the person holding the presidential levers of power, then natural born citizenship derived by birth on US soil to US citizen parents represents the gold standard. This is not difficult logic.
It certainly isn't.
What's difficult, is trying to figure out why some people, while seeming to understand the Framers' reasoning, still support a lower standard of citizenship requirement for the office of president.
The Framers' thinking is beautiful in its simplicity. The thinking of many modern Americans is frustratingly convoluted and complex.
I'm sure their thinking would automatically simplify itself, if they had to live under the conditions that produced this country.