Again, it is an issue of original intent. The intent was to ensure that a candidate did not owe allegiance to a foreign power. Are you seriously concerned that Ted Cruz owes his allegiance to Canada?
I actually do NOT doubt his sincerity or question his allegiances. The fact that he renounced his Canadian citizenship two years ago is a good indicator of his loyalty.
Now that I have answered your question, answer one for me. Do you even know where the Natural Born Citizen clause originates from? I mean who instigated it and why?
I'll cut to the chase here. The original intent of that clause isn't about the loyalty of, or jurisdiction over the President ( although they are absolutely key issues for the electorate consider if the USA is to be protected ), instead it is expressly a concern about how soldiers would accept or question their CinC. Their loyalty is what is at risk.
In summary, your precise question to me is actually the wrong question if you are actually speaking of original intent, a phrase that has historical meaning.
Another question which few ever attempt to answer is this ... How could anyone believe he could keep his Canadian birth a secret? Does no-one realize the enormity of the October surprise that would have been dropped on his head by the (D)ummycrats? Does no-one remember the hidden DUI from Bush43?
The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born†citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth†or “at birth,†either by being born “in†the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth.†Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien†required to go through the legal process of “naturalization†to become a U.S. citizen.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42097.pdf