There’s something almost poetic about watching a United States senator get corrected on live television about his own state’s laws. Not by a political opponent, mind you, but by a friendly interviewer on a network that typically handles Democrats with kid gloves. Yet that’s exactly what happened Sunday when ABC’s Jonathan Karl had to set the record straight for Virginia Senator Mark Warner about Virginia’s voter identification requirements.

The exchange would be funny if it weren’t so revealing. Warner was busy doing what Democrats do best these days, criticizing President Trump’s election security agenda and explaining why his party opposes the SAVE America Act. That’s the legislation requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register for federal elections, which seems like common sense to most Americans but apparently represents some existential threat to democracy according to the left.

Karl asked a reasonable question. Should Democrats support photo voter ID requirements given that polling consistently shows overwhelming public support for such measures? Warner’s response came quick and confident. “You know what? In Virginia, we have voter voter ID and photo ID.”

Except that’s not true. Not even close.

Karl, to his credit, didn’t let it slide. “That’s actually not the case,” he said, noting that he himself is a Virginia voter. “You don’t need to show a photo ID in Virginia. There are a wide range of things you can show for ID. And if you don’t show one of those, you can sign an affidavit.”

An affidavit. Think about that for a second. You can literally just sign a piece of paper promising you are who you say you are, and that counts as voter identification in Virginia. This is what passes for election security in blue states, and Warner couldn’t even accurately describe his own state’s permissive system.

Warner tried to recover, mumbling something about Virginia still having “voter ID of one form or another” before quickly pivoting back to attacking Republican election reforms. Classic deflection. But the damage was done. Here’s a senior Democrat, someone who’s been representing Virginia in the Senate since 2009, and he doesn’t know basic facts about how elections work in his own state.

This matters beyond the immediate embarrassment. When Democrats oppose measures like the SAVE America Act, they claim these reforms are unnecessary because existing safeguards are sufficient. But how can we trust their judgment on election security when they can’t even accurately describe current law? Warner’s flub exposes the intellectual laziness underlying much of the Democratic resistance to common-sense voting reforms.

The broader public gets this instinctively. Poll after poll shows Americans across the political spectrum support requiring identification to vote. It’s not controversial outside the Beltway bubble. You need ID to buy alcohol, board a plane, or pick up prescription medication. Requiring it to participate in selecting our leaders seems like the bare minimum for election integrity.

But Democrats have convinced themselves that any voting requirement whatsoever constitutes voter suppression. They’ve built an entire mythology around this idea, ignoring the fact that states with voter ID laws haven’t seen decreased turnout. Georgia’s election reforms, which Democrats hysterically labeled “Jim Crow 2.0,” preceded record-breaking voter participation.

Warner’s mistake reveals something deeper than simple ignorance. It shows how disconnected these career politicians become from the practical realities of governance. They’re so focused on partisan talking points and national narratives that they lose track of basic facts. And when those facts contradict the preferred storyline, well, just make something up and hope nobody notices.

The real question is why Democrats fight so hard against measures that most Americans consider obvious safeguards. What exactly are they protecting by opposing proof of citizenship requirements? The answer seems clear enough. They benefit from a system with loose verification, where the integrity of voter rolls remains perpetually questionable.

Warner got fact-checked on friendly territory by a sympathetic interviewer. Imagine what scrutiny his positions might face in a truly adversarial environment. But that’s rarely necessary when Democrats can’t even keep their own stories straight.

Related: Mullin’s DHS Gambit Could Finally Force States to Clean Up Their Voter Rolls