My opinion is that Ruger's marketing premise is correct, but the pistol doesn't fit the bill. There is a reality that the better pistols today are un-American. Some people might question whether that is even a criterion when selecting a defensive or law enforcement arm. I don't pretend that it is, but I'm also glad that we can buy guns for all kinds of purposes, reasons or for no reason at all. But if I want to buy an "American" pistol, it would probably be a 1911. Calling Ruger's Glock-alike the "American Pistol" doesn't really fool me.
Practically speaking, a big drawback for me is not having an optics-ready model. In my opinion, the M&P 2.0 is a better pistol. It's just as all-American and less of a Glock copy. But it also suffers from no optics-ready versions. There are some 2.0 CORE's out there, but S&W does not list them and they don't appear to be generally available or at all. A concern I have is that if the factory is unwilling to offer cut slides, there may be a reason and just having it custom-cut invites the unknown.
Someone could argue that Sig is American now or that even Glock is sort of American, but there is no arguing that the foundation of their designs and their products are European. If you don't mind a European design pistol, there are no practical condemnations of them, but if you want an American pistol, I don't think the Ruger is a quintessential one. Now the Blackhawk or the Single Six, those are as American as apple pie.