The thing is, there is no data to suggest that the Russians actually succeeded in influencing anything in our 2016 election.
And you won't find any. Because it is currently not known how to calculate this. Also, as you correctly stated, the idea that Trump won -only- because of Russia is laughable from the very beginning. As long as the democrats will do as they are doing now, even terrible people like Trump could win the Presidency.
However, Russia surely had an influence. Many others did. Many other do all the time: as you correctly say, almost everyone has someone financing them, and trying to orient the vote in any way possible.
The point is (and that was true even before Trump and russian influence): what do you think of someone who receives support from people who are clearly NOT doing the best interests of the US people, and is still ok with this? How do you consider someone like this?
There have probably been many other people on the same, low, level, and I personally have been saying this for a long time: how can they serve the people, if they are so easy to corrupt, if their standards are so low?
The main difference I see is that before, many could tell me, to try and rationalize, "hey, but the big supporter in the dark thinks they are doing the best thing", or "hey, but you cannot say they are bad, it's just a different position"; well, now I can. So what would you think of someone accepting this kind of help?
Trump is not bad because of some ideology; in fact, other people might be as bad as him (in different fashions); he is bad because his skills, intelligence and moral standards are ALL very low. And his idea are a manifestation of this lack of ability.