There are two basic categories to this question I would like us to explore. The first is what I will term the "quantitative" answer, the other is the "qualitative." I will argue for the "qualitative" answer, and although I do not have a specific strategy for accomplishing it beyond what we all already know (support whatever aspect of the progressive movement that you can) I would like to suggest a more specific vision of what a progressive future means.
The quantitative answer goes along the lines that "progressives" want more of some things and less of others. More spending on social programs, less on war. More assistance for homeowners who are underwater, less for irresponsible financial firms that seek bailouts to avoid bankruptcy. More government involvement to assure that everyone receives healthcare, etc.
The "qualitative" answer posits that while all of the above aspects of the "quantitative" approach are valid, they are only parts of what is the larger, more fundamental problem, what makes the difference in regard to all that is at stake: the fundamental nature of "the system." Unless we rework a "system" that is geared to delivering profit and power into the hands of the few, we will always find ourselves fighting a losing battle against the vested interests who manipulate politicians and manipulate the people through campaign spending and control of the media.
Not to totally ignore the question of strategy: a diverse network of well-informed and often successful grassroots activists have been keeping this country from being utterly destroyed for some time now. For example, check out the post "New Salvo in War With Monsanto and GMO Roundup Ready Seed" to see how those who have dedicated themselves to the public interest are standing up against the assaults against humanity and nature.
Now, I will not make a list of issues here in an attempt to flesh out my vision. What I will do is point out the basic premises which have informed the "debate" in the mainstream media and how we as progressives can found a political vision which leaves behind the influence of Marxism. Basically what it comes down to is that the "debate" over the role of government has been controlled by those who cater to an understandable fear of "big government". Progressives refuse to abandon the role of government in securing the individual welfare of citizens through government action in the face of this fear. Perhaps the key component to turning the tide in this "debate" is to take ownership over the issue of "decentralization" from the right.
For the right, decentralization always means a victory for the "individual" (as they would define the term, that which in progressive terminology we label "a--hole"). For the left, decentralization means that the individual's interest is served by the community, and the interest of the community is served by the government. Thus, decreasing the power of the federal government is not the issue; a powerful and capable government is not necessarilly a "big" government.
I said I was not going to make a "list", but let me give a couple of examples. How about de-institutionalizing kids and letting them be involved in their family's life, including their work life, as a way of letting them grow up in a healthy enviroment where they can be nurtured more regularly by their loved ones? How about a federal law instituting a 20 hour work week, so that the former idea becomes practicable in light of the increased freedom-time that everyone will have? How about making that practicable through local zoning which allows small-businesses and agriculture to flourish? And which allows neighborhoods to develop organically according to the needs and resources of individuals who collaborate with others of a similar social and economic status as their own? How about telling the bankster to go ---- themselves if they don't like it? All of these things will be possible along with strong federal regulation of the financial industry, oversight of enviromental laws, federal law enforcement, etc.
One thought re strategy: We have to build a new party from the ground up using a grassroots network, and we have to stick to it loyally whatever the consequences. Less evil is still too evil. Change is coming; we have a limited time to determine of what type it will be.