This really needed to be said, and Jason L. Riley did it in Alabama Disproves the Case Against Voter ID. It's behind a paywall, but here's an important part:
Ultimately, however, white Alabamians made the difference last week. Mr. Jones not only swept the black vote but vastly outperformed Mr. Obama among whites, which is why he became the first Democrat to win a U.S. Senate seat in Alabama in 25 years. Mr. Obama managed just 10% of the white vote in 2008 and 15% in 2012, and he lost the deep-red state handily both times. Mr. Jones won 30% of whites, which enabled him to pull off the upset.
That said, the turnout among blacks, given Mr. Obama’s absence from the ballot, was impressive, and it ought to inform the continuing debate about whether voter identification requirements are tantamount to “voter suppression.” Mr. Krugman might think so, but most black voters disagree with him—as do most whites, most conservatives and even most liberals. A Gallup poll last year put support for voter ID laws at 80% among all groups, including 95% of Republicans, 83% of independents, 63% of Democrats, 81% of whites and 77% of nonwhites. In a 2012 survey published by the Washington Post, 78% of whites, 65% of blacks and 64% of Hispanics expressed support for voter ID laws.
Democratic Party officials and media elites insist that asking people to prove their identities before voting effectively disenfranchises minorities, but most Americans understand the importance of ballot integrity. And if such laws make it too difficult for blacks to cast a ballot, what explains the Obamalike minority turnout for Mr. Jones, given that Alabama implemented one of the country’s toughest voter ID requirements in 2014?
It's enough to make a person suspect that Democrats' resistance to voter IDs really isn't a concern for minorities. It's not a great stretch to remember that most voter fraud tends to favor Democrat candidates and to think that's the class of voters they want to protect.
2:23 PM 12/20/2017