They had a communist party, whose goal was to achieve communism, but they were fully aware they hadn't gotten there yet.
I don't know that their goal ever was to achieve communism; they may have said that they were, but they were de facto implementing state capitalism.
There was a brief period after the Russian revolution when there was true socialism striving for communism, but then the Bolsheviks took power and re-branded themselves as the Communist Party, and it was pretty much straight state capitalism from there on out.
"Such a condition of affairs may be called state capitalism, but it would be fantastic to consider it in any sense Communistic...Soviet Russia, it must now be obvious, is an absolute despotism politically and the crassest form of state capitalism economically"
- Emma Goldman, There Is No Communism in Russia, 1935
Their propaganda was very effective in disguising their state capitalism as communism though - to their own people, but obviously it was quite effective on the US populace as well. It doesn't help that people in the US keep mixing up communism and socialism as one and the same either (and both being somehow bad).
The USSR-style "communism" (i.e. state capitalism) was bad, yes. Socialism in and of itself isn't necessarily bad, nor is communism (if it is implemented as communism and not corrupted into state capitalism or despotism or some other perversion), and socialist democracies, like most of the EU states, aren't bad places to live at all. There are indeed some quite good arguments that US-style capitalism is actually worse than European-style socialist democracy in many ways, but perhaps that is best left for another discussion - it tends to rile up the Americans :)