In practice, there's a functionality bar for editors to clear; the likelihood that you're going to gain massive productivity improvements by switching between editors that are both past that bar is honestly pretty low. And that bar is likely lower than most people think. Reasonable syntax highlighting, good regex support in search/replace, some kind of "project" support, some kind of scriptability, and an ability to set basic editor configuration variables on a per language basis (e,g., 2-space tabs for YAML, 4-space for Python)... once you hit a certain point, then you get into progressively more dubious arguments. "I can change the contents between these parentheses on line 9 by simply typing '9Gf(ci(' while you're clicking in the line with your mouse like an animal!" Good for you, ace, but you're not really saving the time you think you are. (Also, you can perform a rough equivalent of "select or delete the stuff between these parentheses" with a single command in BBEdit, Sublime Text, and Emacs, and I'm sure in many other editors.)
I'm not suggesting all editors are absolutely fungible past a certain point -- there's solid reasons you may prefer one over the other -- but once you get really good with a given editor, "modality is awesome" and "everything in my editor is actually a Lisp command" shouldn't be particularly convincing arguments. Generally speaking, you probably have better things to do with your time than figure out how to replicate your favorite Editor X power moves in Editor Y. Don't you?