It is not that complicated. I don't agree completely with this complicated interpretation. The constitution isn't that complicated (though the arguments of those trying to justify circumventing it get can get complicated). They make several valid points, however: the prohibition is on how electors vote, and not how a running mate is chosen. The later came into existence when political parties corrupted the electoral process and is not part of the constitutionally defined process.

So yes it is possible, when a national party can control electors in many states, to gain sufficient votes to workaround the prohibition in Article II, section 1 of the Constitution. But an easier workaround in the 21st century is for one or the other establish residence in another state. In this example, that would be Trump who already can claim residence in a number of states.