See? There you go. There's the logical AND at work. Your population for no ID just went down again.

What are you talking about? My statement was that you don't need a photo ID to receive medical care. That removes one of the gates you were claiming exists.

Uh, huh. So your "tens of millions" claim was just cut by over 5x due to the power of AND.

No, it wasn't. "Tens of millions" is the number of people who do not have the specific type of ID that proves their citizenship, which is what the SAVE act would require. There are 2.6 million that have absolutely no photo ID whatsoever.

How many of them have a passport, a passport card, or a non-driving state ID?

Very few. Again, surveys of the American people indicate about 10% have neither a driver's license or a passport, or any government-issued photo ID.

voteriders.org - Who doesnt have an id in america today
cdce.substack.com - New cdce survey shows millions lack

Me, I'd like to err on the side of secure ballots. The democrats' values are different.

Indeed. We like to err on not denying people the right to vote. Especially since there is zero evidence that ballots are not secure due to lack of in-person examination of photo ID, but lots of evidence that there are millions of people who do not have the type of ID required by the SAVE Act. The claim of people showing up and doing fraudulent in-person voting is unsupported by evidence - even in this post, you're just linking to some other potential problem, not anything having to do with people fraudulently showing up at the polling place.

Let me ask you a very simple question. Which number do you think is larger? The number of people who fraudulently vote in person each year, or the number of people who lack the identification materials required by the SAVE Act?