In the U.S. election, dozens of Facebook groups appear to support Vice President Kamala Harris but instead spread racist rhetoric, criticize her policies on immigration, and even promote her rival, former President Donald Trump. Researchers from the American Sunlight Project (ASP), a Washington-based nonprofit focused on disinformation, are labeling this as a “bait-and-switch” strategy—a tactic designed to lure in supporters of one political figure while covertly promoting another or undermining the original. This sophisticated misinformation tactic is a troubling reminder of how online platforms can distort political perceptions and influence voter behavior.
The ASP conducted an in-depth analysis of over 300 Facebook groups that position themselves as fan pages for Kamala Harris. Contrary to their supposed purpose, these groups use Harris’s popularity to push inflammatory narratives, spread misinformation, and endorse Trump and his political positions. ASP researchers noted that this strategy preys on the trust Facebook group members typically place in their online communities, turning these groups into unmoderated spaces for abuse, political attacks, and questionable content sales.
“This tactic works because it takes advantage of the inherent trust between group members, who are more likely to believe and share information they see in these spaces, be it election disinformation, miracle cures, or political memes,” says Nina Jankowicz, ASP’s co-founder and chief executive.
Since Harris joined the 2024 presidential race, the use of this tactic has notably surged. This growth highlights both the urgency and difficulty of managing misleading narratives in online groups that were initially created for positive community engagement.
The bait-and-switch tactic in these “Kamala Harris” fan groups typically follows a similar pattern. Group names, banners, and descriptions appear to align with pro-Harris messaging. However, upon joining, members are presented with posts that are critical of her, containing disparaging memes and false statements. For instance, one group features an offensive post of a woman smearing her face with black paint, captioned, “Kamala getting ready to talk to Black people.” This post resonates with Trump’s recurring and false narrative that Harris is inauthentic in her connections with African Americans.
Another group titled “Democratic Voices for President Kamala Harris 2024” falsely endorses Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) slogan and promotes anti-immigration content. Videos from conservative influencer Charlie Kirk, a known Trump advocate, circulate within these groups, reinforcing the Republican rhetoric against undocumented immigration—a direct attack line against Harris in her former role as “border czar.”
This coordinated misrepresentation effectively dilutes Harris’s online support base, using her name as a vehicle for falsehoods and antagonism that harm her credibility with potential voters.
While Harris appears to be the current target, ASP noted that this phenomenon is not isolated. Similar bait-and-switch Facebook groups are being deployed to mislead supporters of other political figures, including Trump. The approach exploits the algorithmic tendencies of Facebook groups, which prioritize posts that engage users—regardless of their veracity or intent—leading to the viral spread of misinformation.
“People on both sides of the political spectrum are being targeted with these tactics, often creating a distorted image of candidates or issues,” says Jankowicz. “As Election Day draws closer, the stakes will only rise.”
The growing number of these deceptive groups suggests that they are the work of multiple actors rather than a single coordinated campaign. Many are operated by individuals outside of the U.S., such as in Africa or Eastern Europe, where Facebook groups are regularly repurposed to tap into high-engagement topics, ASP reported. This geographic distance enables such groups to persist with limited oversight and, often, little awareness of the legal and ethical boundaries tied to U.S. election laws.
Facebook, now under the Meta brand, has publicly touted groups as a way to foster community and connection. However, their open nature, combined with Meta’s limited oversight, has allowed misinformation to flourish. While Meta has stated that “protecting the election on our platforms is one of our top priorities,” the reality of regulating thousands of such groups is challenging.
Meta’s policies prohibit deceptive content and inauthentic behavior, yet these “Kamala Harris” groups routinely violate these rules by misleading users about their intent and purpose. Meta recently phased out CrowdTangle, a popular digital tool used by researchers to monitor online narratives, leaving analysts with limited alternatives. The newly introduced Content Library aims to replace it but is still under development, reducing the immediacy with which researchers can monitor and counter misinformation.
In response to the proliferation of deceptive “Kamala Harris” groups, a Meta spokesperson commented, “We continue to enforce our policies when we find violating content or behavior.” Yet the sheer volume of such groups highlights a significant gap between Meta’s ambitions and the reality of online disinformation management.
This new wave of misinformation has a ripple effect on voter perceptions and the democratic process. By infiltrating groups that users perceive as safe spaces, actors can subtly shape opinions, sow doubt, and discourage voter participation. The tactic’s inherent danger lies in its invisibility—users may not realize they are consuming distorted information until their opinions have been shaped by repeated exposure to misleading content.
In the current election cycle, where Harris’s role as the first Black, South Asian, and female vice president is symbolically and politically significant, the spread of racial and sexist memes in these groups is particularly damaging. Misinformation targeting her image as a “border czar” aims to capitalize on public anxieties around immigration, which remains a polarizing issue. Furthermore, sexist narratives questioning the “readiness” of a female president distract from pressing policy discussions, further complicating the electoral landscape for female candidates.
This trend signals a concerning trajectory for future elections. The bait-and-switch tactic could become more prevalent as foreign and domestic actors recognize its effectiveness in swaying voter perceptions. Without stronger measures from social media companies and heightened public awareness, these groups may increasingly become battlegrounds for influence and disinformation.
Jankowicz underscores the importance of public vigilance, urging voters to critically assess the content they encounter online, especially within Facebook groups. “As we get closer to Election Day and what could be a contentious transition period, it’s essential that people slow down and try to be more deliberate when consuming content online,” she said.
