Tailwind is in every way superior when you are implementing a bespoke design, you develop faster, your CSS is small and less complex, the output is performant, you have a uniform mini-language, if you apply some up front analysis of a design/-system you can generate 90% of your CSS from a normalized configuration.
Now compare that to fighting default styles and complected component styles, applying overrides, extending via SCSS variables and generating your own CSS utilities with SCSS. It's pretty night and day for this use-case.
Component libs for tailwind that compress the classes are a bit funny and IMO you don't get much benefit from them other than playing nice with tailwind. You might have a reason to use tailwind but want predefined component classes? But then you get the same disadvantage that component based libraries like bootstrap have, so the choice is arbitrary here.
What makes _much_ more sense is what tailwindui does, they give you the raw source, so you get to write out of the box components quickly but can pull them apart without friction.
> Now compare that to fighting default styles and complected component styles
As I said, I am NOT fighting default styles. I want them.
I don't WANT to write my own components, just change colors with Sass (and maybe some affordances).
I'm an engineer, not a UX designer, and I don't have budget to hire a UX designer (nor do I pretend to be good at UX like most programmers). Bootstrap is ideal for my situation, and many others in my position.
Also, what are you talking about? Tailwind absolutely does NOT give you out of the box components. Only third-parties, like DaisyUI and OP's link are fully formed components (or the links off of the tailwind page), which are at best like bootstrap and at worse an inconsistent mess.
Well, no. And that's by design. Should you want components, there's an official Tailwind UI[0] that the dgb23 also mentioned. Not to mention the uncountable amount of open-source component libraries.