You're assuming that Democrats have a future as a majority party, and everywhere we look we see democrats losing elections and power.
If we judge every present day rules change by what may happen years into the future we'll change nothing, and judicial activism will always be with us.
We live in the present, and we have an obligation to our children to make this country as safe for them as possible. That won't happen by making deals today based on what may happen years from now.
it may not happen for a while, but the history of our country shows that the pendulum swings both ways. Frankly, you are right about one thing, the Republicans should take advantage of the situation while they can. I a democrat, and if the roles were reversed, that's what I would want.
As far a judicial activism, both sides use it, that is the name of the game.
Actually I am assuming the Dims elect a president some day in the future. In that case I think the seven have committed to supporting any filibuster a group of GOP Senators decide to mount.
I can imagine a senario with a Dim president, a radical judicial nominee, a majority of Dims/RINOs including some of the 7 willing to vote for the nominee. But by taking this deal, they are implicitly promising us not to vote for cloture on any GOP future judicial filibuster whether they agree with it or not.
You are right. The Dims are imploding. They may be years from another President which would let the 7 off the hook on that implied part of the deal. That may be why the made the deal. Certainly McCain is not long for the Senate one would think.