You might want to read them next time. From the one you linked to: "Similarly, in 2008, one of the two major party candidates for President, Senator John McCain, was born outside the United States on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to a U.S. citizen parent. Despite a few spurious suggestions to the contrary, there is no serious question that Senator McCain was fully eligible to serve as President, wholly apart from any murky debate about the precise sovereign status of the Panama Canal Zone at the time of Senator McCain’s birth."
I did read them and I read many others when Obama was running. The interest in this topic over the last 7 years has improved and refined the analysis. The first analysis left open the possibility or allowed the reading into the discussion of a separate category of birth/birth to citizen parents but the next few I looked at for completeness did not and they were both closely reasoned.
As I said it really is no longer possible to separate the idea of born in America from the idea of born in America from citizen parent(s).
Problem is I read so many of them in the years following Obama’s election that I thought I knew the topic and saw what I wanted to see.
There has been more analysis in the ensuing time on Jus sanguinis vs jus soli. Previously the analyses came down on the side of the first, now the second is being recognized as the decider in America. Whether right or wrong that appears to be the American tradition, and convincing documentation and analysis relevant to that point of view has been teased out of the fabric of historical jurisprudence and correspondence.