If that were the case then he just announced to the whole world that he isn't qualified for the office and it didn't even register to him that he did it.
“If that were the case then he just announced to the whole world that he isn’t qualified for the office and it didn’t even register to him that he did it.”
Almost, but not quite. His claim is that any child born abroad with a U.S. citizen parent is a natural born citizen of the U.S. That is a false claim, because he is a child born abroad with a U.S. citizen parent, his U.S. citizen mother (allegedly), which makes him a U.S. citizen naturalized at birth by the authority of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952. Cruz supporters and Cruz are trying to claim that Ted Cruz was not naturalized at birth, instead claiming he was natural born because he acquired citizenship at birth. What they fail and often refuse to understand is such legal terminology is utilized to distinguish between usages that indicate naturalized citizens acquire citizenship at birth, whereas natural born citizens acquire citizenship by birth. This distinction appears in a variety of current and historical authorities ranging from the current U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual and backwards in history to Sir Edward Coke in Calvin’s Case 1608 talking about the distinction between a subject-made (datus), naturalization, versus a subject-born, natural born (natus). The distinctions can be carried further back into time to the multiple layers of citizenship in the Roman Empire and the Roman Republic.