Thanks for pointing out something that was noted four days ago by Shodan and smapti, that has been discussed by quite a few others in this thread, and that you yourself said, in almost exactly the same words, three days ago.
I think we can take for granted, in this conversation, the fact that changing the requirements for President would necessitate a constitutional amendment.
You understand the premise of a “should” question, don’t you? People are not being asked for their opinion on whether a constitutional amendment would pass. They are being asked for their opinion about whether there should be more rigorous and specific qualifications for being elected to, or holding, the office of President.