The Kremlin places significant emphasis on public opinion, with state agencies actively monitoring and analyzing voter sentiment to maintain the facade of legitimacy and stability under President Vladimir V. Putin’s rule. Despite Russia’s increasingly repressive political environment, polling remains a vital tool for the government in managing perceptions both at home and abroad.

Ahead of the parliamentary elections held last month — the first since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 — thousands of government operatives coordinated a tightly controlled political process aimed at projecting popular support for Mr. Putin’s ruling party, United Russia. The party secured 355 of 450 seats in the State Duma, claiming about 58 percent of the vote, surpassing many pre-election expectations. This orchestrated political event involved mobilizing bureaucrats, managing ostensibly opposing parties that largely supported the war effort, and populating state media with compliant candidates. Yet, behind this performance, the Kremlin’s focus on accurate readings of public sentiment reflects an understanding of the complex challenges faced by modern autocracies.

Political scientists note that despite the ability of autocrats to manipulate electoral processes and suppress dissent, gauging public opinion remains essential. For leaders like Mr. Putin, polling serves multiple functions: it bolsters the regime’s legitimacy by simulating popular endorsement; it helps identify potential sources of dissent among the population; and it informs the balancing act of electoral manipulation, ensuring that results appear credible enough to maintain the loyalty of both citizens and elites.

This delicate balancing act is sometimes referred to as the “dictator’s dilemma.” Autocrats must cheat sufficiently to guarantee victory but avoid excessively inflated results that could undermine their credibility. This dynamic was evident this summer when the liberal opposition party Yabloko began gaining traction as an anti-war voice. In response, Russian authorities launched a pressure campaign culminating in the Supreme Court removing Yabloko from the ballot — a move characteristic of the regime’s preference for suppressing opposition through legal and administrative means rather than outright election-day fraud.

Experts highlight the challenges authoritarian leaders face in discerning genuine public attitudes, a difficulty compounded by “preference falsification,” where citizens conceal their true opinions out of fear. This phenomenon can render regimes seemingly stable until sudden shocks expose underlying vulnerabilities. In recent years, Russia has shifted from a “spin dictatorship” relying primarily on information control and managed elections, toward a more overtly repressive model, incorporating open censorship and harsh measures against dissent.

Nevertheless, widespread popular support remains a valuable asset for the Kremlin, as it reduces the need for constant repression and reinforces Mr. Putin’s standing within the political elite. Popularity signals to elites that their leader commands a mandate from the electorate, decreasing the risk of intra-elite coups, which historically have posed greater threats to autocratic rule than popular uprisings.

Elections in Russia thus continue to serve as a crucial source of political legitimacy. Unlike monarchies or ideologically driven regimes, Mr. Putin’s authority is partially rooted in the notion of popular choice—a legacy of Russia’s post-Soviet democratic experiments. As political scientists observe, the persistence of elections reflects the regime’s reliance on the narrative that power ultimately derives from the people, a point Mr. Putin himself emphasized shortly after the exclusion of Yabloko from the parliamentary contest, asserting that the “source of power is the people” and affirming adherence to the principle of popular rule even under difficult conditions.