"Our system doesn't provide for its people very well, but at least it's more moral" is not the strong argument you think it is.

The electoral system in USSR and China worked differently to suit their circumstances and culture. The US depends solely on rigged electoralism where they have two political parties that differs little other than their slogan and branding. USSR allow people to elect members of a political party instead of the election of a political party and they use a high indirect electoral system where people elect leader in the next hierarchy which works at that time due to the mass illiteracy, lack of experience of prior electoral system, political instability, and lack of resource for Western European diapora-styled electoralism. The USSR also use the rule of law and check of power by independent government departments to prevent mass corruption although the Western European diaspora say that any mass protest against Western European authoritarianism must be from one evil authoritarian mastermind that can overcome the fantasy logic of Liberalism to make a fully functioning prosperitive democratic system without the need for free riding unlike Western European diaspora countries.

Single party that produces good results that have alleviated poverty regardless of ideological definition

versus dictatorship of capital that can only become worse over time

Yeah hard choice. Let me stand on my high horse and say these are the same. Let me even joke that America is democratic in the slightest