Thanks for the tag. Synchronicity at play as this piece touches upon a small subset of my articles (politics) and my former present life as an attorney.

Very interesting question you pose. It does seem like you were defrauded but you'll never be able to establish actual damages, which is required to have a sustainable cause of action. Plus, and this is something I rail against, politicians are allowed, under a perversion of the First Amendment, to lie to get elected. Viewed from that lens (https://medium.com/channspirations/of-lenses-15623c1616c5), even if you could establish damages it seems there would be no case. "Our political system has become a battle of who can lie more effectively. It’s disgusting. Free speech does not mean the unfettered right to lie. We have reached the point where lying is so rampant that people expect it and do not care. Perhaps people have been conditioned not to care; or perhaps as long as the lie fits their version of reality, or what they would like the world to look like, they do not question the lies nor demand accountability and truth.

I believe that truth in advertising laws should make all lying designed to promote a political agenda illegal and this would not be unconstitutional as freedom of speech is not absolute." From my https://medium.com/illumination-curated/can-we-please-all-find-the-space-within-which-to-breathe-the-same-air-and-agree-not-to-agree-6b6b2c8077ec

I wrote once that a good use of AI would be to fact-check political speeches and commercials.

Are you familiar with the outright lies and complete life and resume fabrications George Santos used to get elected to Congress as a Republican in a fairly blue district of NY? Wall Street jobs he never held. Claimed to be Jewish (with holocaust surviving grandparents), which he is not, and then after the election said he never claimed to be Jewish but just "jew-ish." There were a couple of other elected candidates elsewhere who it was determined fabricated themselves.