How have Republican justifications for restrictive voting laws evolved when faced with evidence that voter fraud is extremely rare?

Republicans have fundamentally shifted their strategy for justifying restrictive voting laws. Previously, they claimed there was an "epidemic of voter fraud," but this argument became unsustainable due to overwhelming evidence showing that actual instances of voter fraud are incredibly rare. Faced with this reality, Republicans have pivoted from using measurable, factual evidence to relying on intangible public sentiment and feelings. Instead of pointing to concrete data about fraudulent voting activities, they now base their arguments on what people perceive or feel about election security, regardless of whether these concerns are grounded in reality. This strategic shift allows lawmakers to continue pushing for stricter voting regulations without having to provide substantial evidence of actual problems, effectively using public perception rather than facts to drive policy changes.