Is it forbidden to be a politician according to deontological morality?

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that to be a politician in the current reality, one must lie, cheat, and do other immoral things, otherwise one will never be elected. According to utilitarian morality, it seems justified to be a politician even though one will lie and donate, if one thinks that one’s influence will be superior to that of others. In contrast, according to deontological morality, one is forbidden to lie or cheat at all, and therefore, ostensibly, in the current reality, one is forbidden to become a politician. In other words, in principle, it is permissible to be a politician who does not cheat and lie, but then one will not be elected, so in practice this is only a theoretical case.
One could make it difficult and say that if all people were not politicians, society would collapse. But in my opinion, this is not really a problem, because it is not that it is forbidden to be a politician, but rather that theoretically it is permissible to be a politician who does not cheat, meaning that even if you apply Kant’s test of “what if everyone behaved like me,” this should not be a problem.
So, it turns out that the rabbi’s view, which is deontological, to the best of my recollection, is that it is forbidden to be a politician. Does the rabbi agree?