I know many progressives will strongly disagree with me but I don't think the filibuster should be abolished but should certainly be changed from the 60 vote threshold. Without it, we'd have a simple 51 vote majority to pass any legislation and the Party that the President would hold full control over any and every piece of legislation that the Senate passes. Which leaves half of all Americans without a voice in how the nation is governed. Yes, a lot of great things could be accomplished, as long as Democrats hold the Senate, but imagine what would happen with a Republican President. Any progressive law passed could be overturned, any progressive program could be ended, any advance in equality could/would simply disappear. And I shudder to think of this nation being taken back to the 'good old day's' Republicans want. Deregulation of industry, the abolishment of the EPA, OSHA, and the stronger social safety net put in place by the left would simply be overturned or defunded. Taxes would be cut even lower n the rich and big business with higher taxes on the middle class and lower earners forced to make up the difference. Today's Republican politicians think only of power, and will take their revenge on the left, regardless of the fact their policies will destroy what's left of this American experiment in democracy, and we all know that and would be fools to help them achieve that goal of a nation of serfs serving the small Noble class that will rule all. If the filibuster threshold is reduced to, maybe 55?, and made a 'talking' filibuster, the needs of the left (and the rightwing, as well) could be met and the many good things the left wants could be accomplished and the next Congress and President couldn't simply undue those accomplishments with no opposition, but the ability to do so would still be possible while protecting the work of the minority Party. That would bring much needed balance to the government, and the Democratic Party wouldn't be left without the means to keep the Republican Party from simply reversing the progress made.

BTW, you should look up the definition of 'neoliberal' before applying it to Democrats, unless your argument id that the description of the Republican Party applies to the Democratic Party, as well. But in reality it can't or every agency and department and service of the government would've already been sold off to the private sector. As far as I know, Social Security and Medicare, the Veterans Administration, NASA, the 17~ Intelligence agencies, SNAP and WIC (food stamps and assistance to women and infants), and the Housing and Urban Development Agency, section 8 housing assistance, the Highway Administration, and much more, would already be privately owned.