Is it permissible to assert that rationality is about winning? Hume might argue that "winning" is about ends, whereas "rationality" is about means.

Reason is, and ought only to be, the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.

-- D. Hume

However, it is sometimes argued that the word "rational" can be applied to ends, as well as means.

[M]ost preference logicians hold that any logic suitable to this purpose must assume that all rational preference orderings are transitive.

--M. Phipps in "Must Rational Preferences Be Transitive?"

It appears that Mr. Khan's expressed preferences are very likely transitive, but it is difficult to see how this could be argued regarding Mr. Bagehot's preferences. Unlike Mr Khan, Mr Bagehot makes his own desires dependent upon the expressed opinions of those around him.