A FB meme I saw today.

There's no specific fallacy, merely a bad faith assumption in the form of an unsupported claim. Going to the store is essential; voting is, too - in a way - but not as urgent, and so can be delayed.

I would rephrase this as

If someone says its safe to go to the store, but not to vote in person, then they are likely demonstrating a conservative political bias.

As of now, going to the store and voting in person both have a level of risk. Arguably, the risk can be slightly different for each but to call one "safe" and the other "not safe," would either take some serious science of which I am not aware (e.g., polling machines are virus cesspools that cannot be avoided) or display a clear bias that is in line with the Republican party's goal of limiting voting.

I would not go as far to say "they want to cheat" because I think this is a bias that can be subconcious, meaning they are just supporting conservative talking points via the ingroup bias, but are not sure why.

I acknowledge my possible political ignorance here. 1) I don't know if there is any advantage politically to democrats to discourage voting and 2) I don't know if the Republican party offers a legitimate reason for discouraging voting (general voting, not just certain groups of people voting). Happy to be educated on this.