If a majority is in favor of sizably reducing a voting populace by introducing measures that will inordinately affect lower socioeconomic classes, I think I would call opposing such an action democratic. I would call the other a trait of fascism.

Being a majority opinion doesn’t automatically entitle something to be democratic. Restricting voting is automatically undemocratic.

You are an enemy of democracy and should be regarded as such if you truly believe what you’re espousing. No voter should be disenfranchised based on a lie.

A majority thinking something should be done doesn’t make it a good idea.

It would be reasonable if there were documented, regular, and widespread instances of fraud involving non citizens voting. There are not.

Portraying it as unreasonable is saying you are okay with disenfranchising millions of disproportionately poor and minority voters because you are scared of a literal fantasy. Which is to say, you’re being ignorant either willfully or not.

Because an inherent distrust of experts leads to a reduction in expertise which leads to imbeciles being surprised their ideas don’t actually work in the real world.