"what does Hillary's success in the primaries and the popular vote tell us there's demand for?"

Electoral reform? That's not a bad place to start. Probably best not to start with the eliminating the Electoral College. That would require a constitutional amendment. Better to try for state level reforms of gerrymandering and proportional rather than winner-takes-all electoral votes.  Republicans now have total control of the government of half the states so don't expect change to come easy or soon.

"How much taxing Wall Street to pay for social programs qualifies as "progressive" and does pushing jobs programs and relief count?"

Zero, no, and no. At present Wall Street and any other entity holding surplus dollars are quite willing to, in fact, insistent on, 'lending' a substantial portion of them back to US on very favorable terms. In fact, they would even pay US to hold their dollars for them (negative rates on Treasuries) if the "Wall Street' would let them. And, they have a voracious appetite for government guaranteed  student and mortgage loans. Why aren't rates on those much, much lower? Oh, and why not give the Social Security Trust Fund first choice on those loans? I haven't check lately but last time I did, the government paid it around 3% on what it borrowed for the general fund while it was charging 6% and up on student loans. That's quite a spread.  I wonder to whose benefit.

What fiscally progressive means to me is letting the government benefit more from the programs it already guarantees for private benefit. It means advocating for sovereign wealth funds as an alternative and benchmark for private investment funds; for more independent government corporations like TVA;  for a public health insurance option and even better actual health care reform - more doctors, nurses, lab techs, etc. and provide the facilities they need to practice.

Conservatives want to run government like a business. Progressives should give them what they want -- just in a way they don't expect.