Gonna echo the others here and say that, usually when I'm not sure someone would be receptive to communist ideas if I explicitly say they're communist ideas, I just don't use the word communist or reference socialist states when I make those points.

For example, someone mentioned to me that lettuce was nearly 10 bucks a head at the grocery store, meat was getting prohibitively expensive, and overall they couldn't really afford it because their pay wasn't going up to match and if they wanted cheaper food the only other store was a 2 hour drive away and gas is through the roof, (about 6 and a half bucks per gallon for the Yanks here) so I brought up how over the past 2 years the company that owns that grocery store A: reduced their costs B: reduced the pay of the employees at that store C: saw record profits. Someone is taking in the cash, but it sure as hell isn't us, and in fact the ones who are getting paid are doing it at the expense of us getting paid less. Got them to the point that we were joking about eating billionaires when we couldn't buy groceries anymore, quite literally "eat the rich" rhetoric, and they consider themselves conservative.

If someone I'm talking to is at least receptive to the left, but no necessarily to communism, I usually just go with that study that showed socialist states under similar levels of development outperformed capitalist states of healthcare, housing, medicine, etc. or the CIA state department documents saying citizens of the USSR ate about the same amount of calories but had more nutritious food compared to Americans at the time. I bring up Cuba's lack of homelessness and thriving medical advancements all while under embargo, or Vietnam's early response to the pandemic. If they still do the whole "vuvuzela 100 quadrillion dead" thing, I usually find they aren't actually going to be receptive to any attempts to debunk it, and I also don't know all of the arguments so they're bound to find something I'm not aware of. In those cases, I usually just say something like "We don't have to do it in exactly the same way they did, in fact we can't or it won't work. We're not starting with a feudal empire or a country with swathes of rural peasants like in Russia and China. We have to adapt it to our current conditions, to meet our specific needs." It tends to A: shut down a lot of the talking points and B: shift the conversation to discussing what our material conditions are and what a possible solution could look like, which is far more productive than squabbling over a country that hasn't existed since the 20th century with someone who isn't willing to listen to what you have to say about it anyway.

TLDR: If they're conservative or vehemently against socialism, get them to complain about the current system and make your points without saying the S word. If they're at least receptive, but still anticommunist, shift the conversation to one discussing their material needs and what the solutions could be. This is just based on my experience though, YMMV