Report

The Real Mandate: CAF/Democracy Corps Election Poll 2012

Isaiah J. Poole — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:14:06 -0500

ELECTION 2012 REPORT

Warren Buffett has famously said that of course there’s a class war, "and my class has been winning."

But in this election, Mitt Romney – the candidate of, by and for the 1 percent – lost. And he lost significantly because the middle class responded to a class war debate, according to this election day poll by Democracy Corps and the Campaign for America's Future.

Voters are worried about both jobs and deficits. They see the two as the two leading priorities for the president and the Congress.

But these are not parallel worries.

The Voters' Priorities

Their first priority is to create jobs and get the economy going. Many mistakenly believe that large deficits cost jobs. But when we asked them to chose between work to “grow the economy” and a plan to “reduce the deficit,” they chose growing the economy by more than two to one, 62-30, a margin of 31 percentage points. Fifty-five percent said they felt strongly on the first.

Second, voters disagree strongly with the priorities of the elite consensus congealing around the president’s deficit commission co-chairs, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, and his own discussions of a grand bargain with House Speaker John Boehner. Those discussions suggest a deal that trades cuts in Medicare and Social Security for tax reform that lowers rates for individuals and corporations while gaining revenue by closing loopholes – a sort of Romney-lite tax reform.

When it comes to a deficit reduction plan, Americans have clear ideas.

They want tax rates to be raised on the wealthy. 68 percent find a plan that did not raises taxes on the rich “unacceptable.” 70 percent support a plan that raises taxes on the top 2 percent while keeping the taxes of others at the same level. 63 percent would find a plan that continued to tax investors’ income at lower rates than worker’s wages unacceptable. 75 percent would support a plan to create a higher tax bracket for millionaires. 67 percent finds a plan that lowers tax rates on corporations or the rich unacceptable.

They do not want Social Security benefits cut over time. By 62 to 31, they would find a plan that did that unacceptable.

They do not want Medicare payments cut or capped: 79 percent, nearly four out of five, find capping Medicare payments forcing seniors to pay more unacceptable.

By 50 percent to 41 percent, they favor a deficit reduction plan that starts with closing loopholes and raising tax rates at the top, and excludes cuts to Medicare and Social Security over one that closes loopholes but “gets entitlement spending under control, including reducing the growth of Medicare and Social Security.”

The public is very skeptical of the $1.5 trillion in across-the-board cuts in discretionary spending over the next 10 years that Congress has already passed Most Americans do not share the scorn of Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan for poverty programs providing a “hammock” for the lazy.

Seventy-five percent – three-fourths of the country – find a plan unacceptable if it requires deep cuts in domestic programs without protecting programs for infants, poor children, schools and college aid.

Moreover they embrace the president’s argument that we should reduce the deficit and invest in areas vital to the economy at the same time. By 70 percent-27 percent, they support a plan to cut “wasteful spending and abolish special interest tax breaks and subsidies so that we can invest in infrastructure and technology and make sure we support education, Medicare and Social Security which are key to the middle class, over a statement that we have to cut spending seriously and that will require across the board reductions in the size of government…including education, Medicare and Social Security.

Four Pillars of American Majority Opinion

Despite a bad economy, despite the desire for change, Americans rejected the change offered by the tribune of the 1 percent. They want action on jobs and deficits, but put a priority on jobs first.

But they want programs for the middle class – and the poor – protected. Want the rich and corporations to pay their fair share, and expect Congress to focus on wasteful subsidies to entrenched interests – not the programs for the vulnerable when they turn to deficit reduction.

The Washington Post today contains a full-page ad supported by organizations representing the constituencies that helped build the winning coalition. They make it clear that they stand with the American majority. They won’t accept an agreement that sabotages growth or cuts programs vital to basic family security.

Their four pillars:

No deficit reduction until the economy recovers. Good Jobs first.
Roll back tax cuts for the rich – and don’t cut their taxes more.
No cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits.
Don’t make poverty worse by cutting programs for the most vulnerable.

Those principles speak to the values and opinions of most Americans. Just as in the last election, the CEOs will have more money to raise their voices. But they will be speaking past Americans who have a clear view of how we should proceed – and will want to know which side you are on.

Election 2010 Poll

Isaiah J. Poole — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 12:03:17 -0400

Read full poll results »

For this survey, Democracy Corps and the Campaign for America's Future surveyed 1,000 people who voted in 2008 on Nov. 2 and Nov. 3, including 114 who decided not to vote in the 2010 election, to determine the issues driving both voters and nonvoters on Election Day.

The survey shows that voter fears about the economy drove this election, as well as deep anger at the failure of government to make it work for middle class families, even as Wall Street got bailed out.

Election 2010 Poll Slide Presentation

View more presentations from OurFuture.org.

Highlights from the poll include:

Fifty-eight percent of respondents who voted said they were trying to send a message about how dissatisfied they are with things in Washington. But they were not necessarily embracing the Republican party and its policies: Both political parties received equally poor favorability ratings, as did the Tea Party movement. Twenty-six percent of voters said they were trying to send a message to "both parties" with their vote, while only 20 percent cited President Obama and 15 percent said Democrats in Congress.

LISTEN

Progressive talk show host Rick Smith discusses the Democracy Corps/Campaign for America's Future poll with OurFuture.org editor Isaiah J. Poole.

"Too much bickering in Washington" was the top complaint of voters in the poll (39 percent), followed by "too much spending, taxes and deficits" (35 percent).
Fifty-eight percent of voters said they were much or somewhat more likely to vote for a candidate that promised "to change Washington for the middle class. That means eliminating the special deals and tax breaks won by corporate lobbyists for Wall Street, paid for by American taxpayers and workers' outsourced jobs. Republicans have pledged to protect those breaks. We should cut taxes for the middle class and small business to create jobs."
Compared to a candidate who attacked Democrats for the economic stimulus and health care reform, 57 percent of voters said they were much or somewhat more likely to support a candidate with a "made-in-America" campaign message that points out that Republicans have "pledged to support free trade deals and protect tax breaks for companies that send American jobs to India and China."
Eighty-nine percent of those surveyed agreed with the statement that "America is falling behind" in the global economy and that "we need a clear strategy to make things in America, make our economy competitive, and revive America's middle class."
Sixty-nine percent said that "politicians should keep their hands off Social Security and Medicare" as they attempt to address the national deficit.
A majority opposed the Republican plan to cut $100 billion from domestic spending programs while extending the Bush tax cuts to those earning more than $250,000, while 51 percent said they agreed that those top-end tax cuts should expire and with proposals offered by Democrats to reduce the deficit over time.
Significant majorities in the poll supported new investments in infrastructure through a national infrastructure bank, a five-year strategy for reviving manufacturing in America

Read full poll results »

More election analysis from OurFuture.org is on our Election 2010 page.

Deficits And Economic Recovery

Isaiah J. Poole — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:45:41 -0400

Deficits and Economic Recovery

View more presentations from OurFuture.org.

Politicians will face major voter backlash if they advocate cuts in Social Security benefits or choose deficit reduction over job creation, according to a poll by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner commissioned by the Campaign for America’s Future and Democracy Corps, with support from MoveOn.org; the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, and the Service Employees International Union.

Memo: "The Big Decisions Ahead on Economic Renewal and Reduced Debt"

Commentary by Robert Borosage: "Rebuild America, Don't Sack It"

Full poll results

Complete Powerpoint presentation

Audio of news conference

At this difficult moment for the struggling economy and country, voters show an uncommon common sense about the choices ahead. For sure, they are concerned about deficits and what impact that will have on future job creation and key obligations, like Social Security. But they are as intent on learning politicians’ plans for investing in new industries and rebuilding the country as they are on learning their plans to reduce the deficit over the next five years. They think they know how we got into this mess – foreign wars and bailouts – and are determined that the highest income earners and big banks finance deficit reduction, not the middle class through Social Security and Medicare cuts or a national a sales tax.

Voters take the long view, seeing the need for both a commitment to a 21st century economy and long-term strategies to reduce the deficit. These are complimentary, not exclusive goals. Progressives need to show they are serious about the deficits, but once they do, voters turn to them, not conservatives, for the right spending priorities and answers.

Voters are united on this key point: Social Security and Medicare are off-limits as a way to reduce the deficit. It is the threat to Social Security that leads many voters to prioritize deficit reductions. Voters instead want to see higher taxes on top income earners and big corporations.

As Social Security celebrates its 75th anniversary this week in the midst of this troubled economy, voters across the political divide want these programs defended.

Read the full memo »

Key findings of the poll:

68 percent said they would oppose making major spending cuts in Social Security and Medicare to reduce the deficit, while 28 percent said they would favor cutting those programs. That included 61 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of independents.
Strong majorities support progressive solutions for addressing the federal deficit: 63 percent back lifting the Social Security cap on incomes higher than $107,000 a year; 64 percent would favor eliminating tax breaks for corporations that outsource jobs; 62 percent would support a tax on excessive Wall Street bank profits.
Strong majorities also oppose common conservative proposals for addressing the budget deficit: 65 percent oppose raising the Social Security retirement age to 70; 65 percent oppose replacing Medicare with a private sector voucher; 62 percent oppose a 3 percent federal sales tax; 60 percent oppose raising the Medicare age from 65 to 67.

More people support a message that embraces the need for both investments in our future and reduce the deficit over time (52 percent) than a message that only stresses cuts in spending (42 percent). Also, almost equal percentages of respondents were favorable toward “a plan to invest in new industries and rebuild the country over the next five years” (60 percent) and “a plan to dramatically reduce the deficit over five years” (61 percent).
62 percent of respondents support more federal to states once they understand that the aid comes in the context of states laying off teachers, first responders and other essential workers due to the recession. That includes 55 percent of independents and 48 percent of Republicans.
60 percent of those surveyed responded positively to an economic message that said that “we have a budget deficit, but … we also have a massive public investment deficit” that requires us to “rebuild the infrastructure that is vital to our economy” and to the economic growth that will “generate revenues to help pay down the budget deficit.” This message tests better than any other progressive message on investment as well as more conservative messages focused on spending cuts.

The survey of 1,000 2008 voters was conducted July 26-29, 2010. The margin of error is 3.1 percentage points.

America: A Center-Left Nation

Isaiah J. Poole — Tue, 18 May 2010 12:54:32 -0400

Barack Obama promised change during his White House campaign last year and ran on a distinctly liberal platform of comprehensive health care reform, investing in new energy and good jobs, ending the Bush‐era tax cuts for the very wealthy, and ending the war in Iraq. Obama won more votes than any other candidate in American history, and his victory capped off several years’ worth of sweeping Democratic electoral wins.

Yet almost within hours of Obama’s victory, portions of the political press corps insisted America remained firmly planted on the “center‐right” of the political spectrum.

From the press’ perspective, the broad Democratic wins last November did not signify a sea change in American politics, which was how the media treated big Republican wins in 1980 and 1994. Instead, the Democratic wins last year unfolded in spite of voters’ natural conservative leanings.

It made sense for partisan conservatives, eager to downplay their losses, to push the center‐right claim in the wake of November’s stinging defeats. (Karl Rove, appearing on Fox News the day after Obama’s win: “Barack Obama understands this is a center‐right country.”) It’s misleading, though, for the news media to echo that spin, since it’s not factually sound. Still, months into Obama’s first term, the center‐right claim enjoyed widespread media acceptance.

The center‐right trend is a familiar one. For years, the Beltway press has consistently announced, in spite of widespread issue‐based polling data that proved otherwise, that America leans center‐right, while implying that Democrats are electorally successful only if they’re able to camouflage whatever liberal impulses they might have. ʺThese Democrats that were elected last night are conservative Democrats,ʺ said CBS’ Bob Schieffer the day after they scored big wins in the 2006 midterm elections.

It wasn’t true, though. A Media Matters survey of the 30 newly elected House Democrats who took Republican seats in 2006 found that they advocated liberal positions, such as raising the minimum wage, changing course in Iraq, funding embryonic stem cell research, and opposing any effort to privatize Social Security.

The strong job approval ratings that Obama has posted during his first months in office, during a period when he unveiled an often proactive and progressive agenda, undercut the claim that the country is center‐ right. In fact, conservative commentators, particularly those on Fox News, have portrayed Obama as so liberal that his activist agenda bordered on socialist or even Marxist. Yet according to Gallup polling, Obama’s approval ratings for this first 100 days in office were higher than those of any president since Ronald Reagan and higher than seven of the last eight presidents at the 100‐day mark. It doesn’t seem likely that an entrenched center‐right nation would reward such a liberal president with historically high job‐ approval ratings. However, a centrist or center‐left nation would.

And all indications today are that America is becoming just that. Polling data regarding a wide range of issues, including the role of big business, health care reform, gay marriage, stimulus spending, international trade, and Social Security, indicate that Americans are increasingly receptive to and comfortable with a progressive agenda.

America: A Center-Left Nation

Isaiah J. Poole — Wed, 27 May 2009 10:35:42 -0400

» Read the full report
» Blog: "Center-Left America"

Audio: Robert Borosage explains the report's findings..

Then-Sen. Barack Obama promised change during his White House campaign, and he ran on a distinctly progressive platform. Clean energy, affordable college, comprehensive health care reform. Obama’s victory capped off several years’ of sweeping Democratic electoral wins, each more progressive than the last.

But conventional wisdom still calls America a “center-right” nation. Immediately after the election, Newsweek editor Jon Meacham insisted that to govern successfully, Obama had to become a center-right leader in order to match America’s “instinctively conservative” streak.

Conventional wisdom is wrong.

America is more progressive than many people think. Public opinion shows the popularity of progressive policies. Demographics show the rise of progressive demographic groups. The new report we are publishing with Media Matters for America documents the trends and challenges the mainstream media to recognize reality.

Public opinion

Our report examines public opinion on a range of issues, from the role of government to universal health care.

Health care: "In general, would you favor or oppose a program that would increase the federal government's influence over the country's health care system in an attempt to lower costs and provide health care coverage to more Americans?"— CNN/Opinion Research Corporation, Feb. 18-19, 2009

Favor	72 percent
Oppose	27 percent

Energy: Would you prefer the government to increase, decrease, or not change the financial support and incentives it gives for producing energy from alternative sources such as wind and solar? —Gallup, March 5-8, 2009.

Increase	77 percent
Decrease	8 percent

Stimulus: “Which do you think is more effective in stimulating the nation's economy and creating jobs: An economic agenda focused on returning money to taxpayers through tax cuts, or an economic agenda focused on spending for improvements to the country's infrastructure such as roads, bridges and schools?” Los Angeles Times, December 6-8, 2008[i]

Infrastructure	54 percent
Tax Cuts	33 percent

Demographics

We examine population demographics, which are also pointing left. The bedrock voters of the conservative movement are growing older and declining in number. America is becoming an increasingly diverse, younger and more metropolitan.

Younger voters: People under 30 chose Obama for President by a full 34 point margin over McCain (66 percent to 32 percent). Even more impressive than the margin was the diversity. Obama scored a 91 point margin among young African Americans (95 percent to 4 percent), and a 57 point margin among young Hispanics (76 percent to 19 percent). He even won young whites by a 10 point margin (54 percent to 44 percent), a strong contrast to his 14 point deficit among whites aged 45 to 64 (42 to 56 percent).

Hispanic voters: Two-thirds (65 percent) of registered Hispanic voters identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party. The gap is driven by the same issues that drive white voters — a general dissatisfaction with the state of the country, and their priority issues of education, health care and jobs. In the 2008 presidential election, Obama won Hispanics by 36 points (67 percent to 31 percent).

Unmarried Women: Women as a whole tend to lean Democratic, and Obama outscored McCain among women by 56 percent to 43 percent (compared to 49 percent to 48 percent among men). But this is only the tip of the iceberg. The most important hidden block is unmarried women, who chose Obama by a stunning 41 point margin (70 percent to 29 percent). Unmarried women are growing in number, and registering to vote in record numbers.

What it means

The wind is at our backs. It’s safe to push. It’s important that we do. We need to channel the energy of our center-left nation, and achieve the promise, not the compromise. The crisis is great, bold action is needed, and the people are hungry for progressive change.

The Change Election Awaiting Change

Robert Borosage — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:22:40 -0500

A survey of 2,000 voters taken during and immediately after the November 4, 2008, general election shows that Sen. Barack Obama’s historic victory in the presidential race spearheaded a sea-change election. It marks the end of the conservative era that has dominated our politics since 1980 and the beginning of a new era of progressive reform, driven by an emerging progressive majority.

RELATED RESOURCES

In responses to a broad range of questions, the repudiation of President George W. Bush, the Republican Congress and the conservatism they championed is clear.

The survey also reveals the consolidation of a new majority coalition and the mandate for progressive reform that Obama and congressional Democrats have. Republicans emerge from this election as an aging, monochromatic, largely regional party, increasingly in the grip of its evangelical base. Democrats are consolidating a governing majority in what is, increasingly, a center-left nation.

Read full report >>

KEY FINDINGS

From the Democracy Corps/Campaign for America's Future poll:

The top reasons polled voters supported Barack Obama: Would withdraw troops from Iraq (35 percent), would be for the middle class (32 percent) and has a plan for affordable health care for all (29 percent)
The top issues that voters think Obama should focus on: Reducing unemployment and getting the economy moving (62 percent), investing in alternative energy and getting us off foreign oil (44 percent), changing the health care system (21 percent)
Economic policies at or near the top voters want Obama to address: Repealing the Bush tax cuts for those earning more than $250,000 and cutting taxes for people making less (60 percent), making job-creating investments in infrastructure (60 percent), raise the minimum wage (54 percent), enacting a three-month moratorium on all foreclosures (51 percent), repealing tax breaks that benefit companies that export jobs overseas (50 percent)
Voters agree that: The middle class is more threatened by global trade and greedy CEOs than by loo-lenient immigration and affirmative action policies (60 percent), they are more worried about giving additional tax breaks to the rich and corporations than about going too far (61 percent), we need to reform public schools and invest properly in them rather than give parents private-school vouchers (68 percent).
But voters are split on investment vs. spending: 49 percent fear going too far in increasing government spending; 48 percent worry that the country won't make the investments needed to strengthen the economy.

The results are based on a poll of 2,000 voters conducted November 4 and 5, 2008.

Congressional Elections Deliver A Progressive Mandate

Bernie Horn — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 09:58:12 -0500

In hotly contested 2008 congressional races, Democratic winners were—overwhelmingly—real progressives who campaigned and won on progressive platforms. Voters didn’t just elect Democrats, they elected progressive

The election of many new progressive Democrats to the House and Senate represents a clear mandate for progressive change. In 2006, some commentators cited the victory of Heath Shuler, D-N.C., to argue that Democrats won because they campaigned as moderates or conservatives, not progressives. That argument cannot be made in 2008.

For this report, the Campaign for America’s Future researched the issue positions of U.S. House and Senate candidates in competitive races. Needless to say, the economy was the overwhelming issue in the minds of voters. In order to compare candidates across the nation, CAF selected six major economic issues that distinguish progressives from conservatives and moderates:

quality, affordable health care for all,

the Employee Free Choice Act,

progressive tax legislation similar to Obama’s (tax increase for the rich, cuts for the rest);

a trade position that opposes NAFTA-style trade agreements,

opposition to Social Security privatization; and

a focus on developing clean energy sources over “drill, baby, drill.”

This report analyzes elections where Democrats won Republican seats in the U.S. House and Senate. The study focuses on those seats because they demonstrate the strong ideological shift from the outgoing 110th to the incoming 111th Congress.

Related Resources

House of Representatives Voting Records On Key Progressive Legislation

To determine the ideology of Democratic and Republican candidates who are not currently members of Congress, CAF examined campaign web pages, newspaper articles, published interviews, television and radio commercials posted on the Internet, and endorsements from allied labor, health and trade organizations. Where candidates were incumbent members of Congress, CAF also researched floor votes on the issues. In this analysis, an incoming member of Congress who favors the progressive position on at least five of these six issues is considered to be a solid progressive.

The Stress Test

Terrance Heath — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:38:49 -0400

The headlines scream bad news about the economy: Prices are high and rising; wages are not keeping up. Homes foreclose at a record pace. Gas prices are at record highs. While economists and politicians debate whether or not we’re technically in a recession, most Americans feel we’ve been in a recession for years. People know in their guts that something is wrong.

To show how the economy affects working families, The Campaign for America’s Future has designed an economic stress test. Assessing the condition of jobs, housing, health care, and household costs on a state-by-state basis over time, the CAF stress test illustrates the troubles families face and shows the way to solutions.

"The Stress Test" shows trouble across the board. It shows flat wages and rising costs. It shows more people without health insurance and the neglect of such established public responsibilities as state support for college education. It demonstrates overall economic mismanagement and it quantifies the general level of stress in this historically optimistic country.

Read the full report (PDF) | State stress test statistics

What "The Stress Test" Measures

Jobs

Unemployment rates and changes in unemployment rates (March 2000-March 2008)
Changes in the number of goods-producing and service-providing jobs (March 2000-March 2008)
Changes in available construction jobs (March 2000-2008)
Changes in available manufacturing jobs (March 2000-2008)
Changes in average weekly wage (Q3 2001-Q3 2007)

Costs and quality of life

People without health insurance, per 1,000 residents; rate and change over time; overall and employer-based (2000-2006)
Population spending 25 percent of pre-tax income on health care; rate and change (2000-2008)
Public college tuition as a percentage of income; rate and change over time (2000-2001 – 2006-2007)
Bankruptcy, per capita; rate and change over time (2006-2007)
Foreclosures, per capita (2007)
Average price of gas, change over time(January 2000-February 2008)

The Solutions

To relieve this economic stress, this report shows, we need a new economic strategy. We need to stop using tax dollars to bail out Wall Street bankers and start using public money to benefit the struggling middle class. This means the creation of new, good jobs here at home and a strategy for retaining knowledge and technology in America. We need to expand public investment in infrastructure as well as human capital in order to ensure the safety and well-being of all Americans. This includes investment in roads, bridges, education and health care. These reforms are the foundation for a new economy in which all Americans benefit.

The elements of the new direction include:

New Energy for America
We should launch a concerted drive for energy independence, and put people to work building a green economy.

A National Strategy in the Global Economy
We need a clear strategy for our nation in the global economy. The first step out of the hole we are in is to stop digging. No more NAFTAs, no more trade accords written by and for multinational corporations and banks.

Invest in People and Basics that Work
We need to ensure our children have access to the best education in the world: universal pre-kindergarten, smaller classes in earlier grades, challenging after-school programs, and affordable college or advanced training. Invest in repairing roads and bridges, sewage systems and school buildings, ensuring that the jobs created are good jobs.

Health Care for All
We need to revive the American Dream and help working families with the basics. We should start with health care reform, providing for all a guaranteed choice of health care, just as members of Congress have. Provide every business and individual with the option of either keeping their current private plan, if they like it, or the ability to buy into a high-quality public plan.

Sharing Prosperity
We need to correct the imbalance between the top floor and the shop floor to ensure that profits and productivity are widely shared. Raise the floor – increase the minimum wage, guarantee workers paid sick days and family leave. Empower workers to organize, pass the Employee Free Choice Act, turn the National Labor Relations Board back into a watchdog for workers. Pass comprehensive immigration reform, gain control of our borders and enforce fair labor standards so employers can’t exploit undocumented workers.

Americans have a right to know how we can build a sustainable economy. Presidential candidates need to address the issues that are relevant to working Americans, refocusing national attention from the wants of Wall Street to the needs of Main Street. We can begin to relieve Americans’ economic stress by challenging candidates and elected officials to support and promote real solutions to real economic problems.

Stress Test State Reports

See the level of economic stress in your state.

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky

Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota

Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

The Decline of Conservatism

OurFuture.org Staff — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:39:11 -0400

Progressives Rising

Robert Borosage — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:52:36 -0400

The 2008 election has the potential to be not simply one of change, as conventional wisdom suggests, but of sea-change, one that marks the end of the conservative era that has dominated our politics over the past three decades and the beginning of a new era of progressive reform. This report details the signs of the emergence of that era, and cautions that progressives will not only have to continue to drive the debate in the election season, but will also have to define, expand and claim the mandate after the election.