Any practical reason not to filibuster legislation RE judicial appntmnts

Are there any good reasons not to have filibustered various pieces of legilation (SS and Bankuptcy), with regards to judicial appointments?

If Dems did filibuster some of these, is there any indications that the pukes would then change the rules? What indication is there that the pukes won't do that anyways or that they won't do it in time for judicial appointments?

After all, the pukes seem content that for now they can grab a few turncoat Dems on bad pieces of legislation (bankruptcy, etc)...

But if this didn't seem to be a viable option, why wouldn't they change th rules?

This is the problem with the party. It can't play tough (even when it's as low as it is) - either the state,local, or national levels. Dems can't even gerrymander districts properly. Pathetic. Grow some cojones dammit!

might get mad at them, other than that there is NO reason.

of who did vote for it?

I think only 23 Senators voted against cloture.