Yes, Putin is popular because he is a crucial part of the state. After the shitshow that was the 90s, his name is synonymous with stability. You quite literally have to be an extremist to want to put that stability on the line. Even if you’re not fond of him, you have to recognise there’s no safe, viable alternative. There’s no way that the people most invested in the Russian state would let anyone else take the presidency without Putin’s consent.
In that sense the elections are fake: they’re not letting anyone else near the Kremlin no matter what. As opposed to the US where you’ll have two fake options.
Personally I think it’s weird to reject electoralism in the US/West and then to start defending Russian election results as ‘real’ because Putin is popular. You’re still playing the liberal game of electoralism.
In that regard being close to having nukes already gives you much of the leverage of having them. Countries don’t build nukes because they plan on actually using them. It’s about the threat, which still exists to a large extent if you are close to getting the bomb. But without the cost of maintaining nukes.
Investing in missile and nuclear technology is worth it because that tech can be used for other applications. Actual nukes just sit in a warehouse until they have to be replaced.