I wouldn’t. But then I wouldn’t argue they are of unequal quality either. That’s the point.
I could tell you which I prefer, and I might or might not be able to explain why, but I would never pretend that my preference aligned with some objective standard of quality.
Alternatively, if you explained what you mean by “quality,” then maybe I could offer up something. But as it is, I have no idea what you mean by “quality” other than your subjective preference. That you, I and others share the same subjective preference might reinforce our certainty and create the illusion of objectivity, but it is subjective nonetheless.
As much as I love the idea of Langston Hughes being offered up as objectively “better” than Longfellow, I’m afraid that those who usually feign authority to make such determinations would disagree. For those who pompously defend the Western Canon as objectively “better,” Longfellow is always included. In contrast, until very recently (and still in some circles) the likes of Langston Hughes were thought to be far more representative of “cultural decay, loss of confidence, and a simple dumbing down of the way we all live.” Fortunately, those perceptions have changed even though Hughes’ poetry hasn’t changed. That said, there are still those who are dismissive of authors like Hughes, and use supposedly “objective” standards to make their case.
Take for example “Human Accomplishment,” the absurd book by bigoted pseudoscientist Charles Murray (of Bell Curve fame), in which Murray pretends to “objectively” rank all of human accomplishment across a variety of disciplines through 1950. In it, he supposedly determines the most significant figures in all of Western literature, and Longfellow easily makes the list, ranking of “equal quality” to John Steinbeck, Henry David Thoreau, and better than George Orwell. On the other hand, Hughes doesn’t even make the list. He’s in good company. Black intellectuals, artists, and music from the first half of the 20th century are almost completely shut out. But what else would one expect from Charles Murray?