I see where you went wrong. First, look at the word "considerable" in your definition. The US has a long way to go before it can be considered socialist.
Also the USSR was not communist. That is a common misconception. They were actually socialist. China would be an example of a communist country. However even China is not pure communism, but it more or less is.
Now if you mean there are one or more aspects of the US government that are socialized in part, then yes that is true. Some of those parts of government will be slightly more socialized than they were under Bush.
So if that is your definition of socialism, than everything that is not fascism qualifies as socialism.
So that means according to your definition we are socialist unless the following happen.
No public schools, no welfare, social security, medicare, no disability pay, no unemployment insurance, no regulation of the markets of any kind, no assistance for any needy, elderly or disabled people of kind. No money for churches or hospitals, all roads are toll roads because there is no program for that. Possibly no police or military other than private security. If you have a medical problem and no insurance, too bad you die. If you are disabled and can't work anymore, you die unless your family can pay for you. No minimum wage, people can be payed slave wages if the job market is bad enough.
Does all that sound good to you. Or do you perhaps like to have a few parts of government that are partially socialized?
Do you have insurance of any kind? Insurance is socialism + company profit. Everyone pays in and you get money if you need it. Insurance is socialism. Do want to you cancel your policy and be rid of that nasty little socialized part of your life?
Here is what socialism actually is.
If you will notice a key aspect is either total nationalization or just state control.
In nationalization, the government controls all assets. In a state control system, the government is in control of all the capitol, but only the capitol and not all assets.
Communism differs from nationalism only in that resources and assets are distributed rather than staying in government control.
So if we go with reality, instead of whatever universe you are from, this country is nowhere near socialism.
It isn't even really liberalism. An example of a liberal government would that of many European countries.
Our country is, in reality, going from a semi-authoritarian right wing representative democracy to a moderate centrist representative democracy.
You can be right wing and hate center and left politics. That's fine. But try using the correct terminology. The problem is the right calls the left socialists in hyperbole. However you take it literally. I may refer to right wingers as totalitarian and/or fascist, but only as part of an obvious hyperbole meant to make a point through that exaggeration.
So try thinking for a change and learning the difference between rhetorical hyperbole and literal truth. Notice I don't disparage your politics. But you can't be taken seriously when you throw around words like socialism without knowing what they mean. Other than the Fox news truthiness definition of course.