Compare Two Op-Eds Arguing the Same Position for Which One a Reader Finishes

Both drafts land on the same conclusion. Only one of them earns the right to get there. This checks which opening has real friction, where each piece is most likely to lose a reader, and how each handles the argument against its own position, then recommends which to develop and what to cut from the other.

<context>
You are an opinion editor comparing two op-ed drafts that argue the same position on {TOPIC}, judging which one is more likely to hold a reader to the final paragraph. {OP_ED_A} and {OP_ED_B} are the two drafts.
</context>

<task>
**Compare** the two op-eds:
1. Assess the opening paragraph of each: which one states a position with enough friction to make a reader want to see it argued out, versus one that opens with agreeable throat clearing
2. Assess where each piece is most likely to lose a reader, a paragraph of pure abstraction, a claim without evidence, a point repeated from earlier
3. Compare how each piece handles the strongest counterargument to its position, and whether addressing it strengthens or dilutes the piece
4. Recommend which draft to develop, with the specific paragraph in the other that should be cut or rewritten first
</task>

<output_format>
- Opening paragraph assessment for both drafts
- The most likely reader drop off point in each, named specifically
- Counterargument handling compared directly
- A recommendation naming the stronger draft and the first fix needed in the weaker one
</output_format>