When Donald Trump secured the presidency in 2016, celebrations erupted in Moscow.

Fast forward eight years, through two elections and a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the initial excitement has faded, replaced by a mix of disappointment and a sense of schadenfreude.

While it may be commonly believed that the Kremlin longs for Trump’s return, the truth is that neither of the potential future presidents is likely to fulfill all of Moscow’s desires.

Starting with Trump: since his initial campaign, he has garnered a certain admiration from Moscow. Specifically, Russian President Vladimir Putin appreciates Trump’s evident admiration for him.

“Putin is a short, vain man,” remarks Nina Khrushcheva, a professor at The New School in New York and the great-granddaughter of former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev.

“The Kremlin enjoys that the tall, wealthy Trump is completely in awe of Putin,” she continued. “This dynamic gives Putin an advantage.”

Although Trump’s strongman image and ostentatious persona may not appeal to the more conservative elements in Western Europe, the Russian elite is quite familiar with extravagant displays of wealth and autocratic leadership.

Moreover, Trump’s conspiratorial mindset aligns with a pervasive belief among many Russians, perpetuated by their leaders and media, that ordinary Americans are under the control of a deep state.

The Kremlin’s primary interest in Trump lies in his position on Ukraine. The Republican nominee has vowed to resolve the conflict in a single day, likely by compelling Kyiv to concede territory. His running mate, JD Vance, is a staunch opponent of further aid to Ukraine.

Abbas Gallyamov, a former Kremlin speechwriter, stated, “Putin is in urgent need of a victory. A prolonged conflict that he cannot win undermines his legitimacy.”

However, there are challenges associated with Trump. Moscow experienced this during his initial term when he failed to fulfill his commitments, particularly regarding the improvement of relations with Russia and the lifting of Western sanctions related to the annexation of Crimea and the situation in eastern Ukraine.

Now, nearly eight years later, as Putin’s brief invasion plan extends into its third year, there is skepticism in Moscow that even a pro-Kremlin president could alleviate Washington’s animosity.

Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s security council, expressed on Telegram, “The election will not alter anything for Russia, as the candidates embody the bipartisan agreement that our nation must be defeated.”

He dismissed Trump’s statements about ending the conflict and fostering a positive relationship with Russia as “trivialities.”

“He cannot bring an end to the war. Not in a day, not in three days, not in three months. And if he genuinely attempts to do so, he could end up like the new JFK,” Medvedev remarked.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov remarked earlier this week that regardless of the election outcome, there is little expectation for a shift in America’s stance towards Russia.

In a notable response, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov addressed former President Trump’s recent assertion that he was close to achieving a nuclear disarmament agreement with Moscow and Beijing during his first term. Ryabkov firmly stated, “No, this does not correspond to reality.”

Additionally, there is Vice President Kamala Harris, who received a sardonic endorsement from Putin in September. During a panel at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, Putin referred to President Joe Biden as “our favorite, if you can call it that,” at an event aimed at promoting investment in Russia’s eastern regions. After Biden exited the race, Putin indicated that Russia would follow the Democratic president’s suggestion to “support” Harris, commenting on her “expressive and infectious laugh,” which drew laughter from the audience.

Gallyamov, a former Kremlin speechwriter, dismissed Putin’s remarks as a typical KGB tactic intended to benefit Trump. However, Krushcheva suggested that there might be some truth in them. She noted that while Trump’s promise of a quick resolution to the Ukraine conflict, potentially granting territory to Moscow, may not align with Putin’s goals, the Russian leader has made the war central to his legacy and will continue it as long as he deems necessary.

Harris could potentially contribute to maintaining a status quo that Moscow perceives as advantageous, especially as Western resolve appears to wane in the face of Russia’s ongoing aggression. As a representative of the U.S. foreign policy establishment, Harris serves as both a counterpoint to Putin and a rationale for his prolonged conflict against what he terms “American hegemony.”

The Kremlin appears to have a vested interest in the upcoming election, regardless of its preferences between the two candidates. U.S. intelligence and technology experts have accused Russia of perpetuating the dissemination of deep-fake videos and other forms of disinformation aimed at swaying the electoral process.

Much of this content seems to target the Democratic side; for instance, one outlandish claim suggested that Harris had killed an endangered rhino in Zambia. However, the overarching goal seems to be to erode public confidence in the electoral process as a whole. Russian state media has characterized the lead-up to the election as a mix of a circus and a battleground.

If the Kremlin were to participate in the voting process, it is highly likely that it would favor chaos, division, and a sense of disillusionment regarding American democracy.

Currently, it appears to have a strong opportunity to achieve this outcome.