The source for eating sufganiyot is the letter of the Rambam's father R. Maimon in which he describes the tradition of eating sufganiyot:
ופשט המנהג לעשות סופגנין...והם הצפחיות בדבש
Thus, sufganiyot correspond to the manna. A debate about whether sufganiyot are superior to hamentaschen would replicate the debate between Turnus Rufus and R. Akiva over which is superior, the creations of God or of man. R. Akiva's victory in that debate would make this superfluous. (This would also explain why we eat sufganiyot on Chanukah, which stands for the open miracle of divine intervention, in contrast to the hidden miracle of Purim in which all events seemingly stem from human action.)
Instead, the debate centers on the hamentaschen (which must be filled with poppy seed, an opiate product popular in the Persian empire) and the latke, made of fried potatoes and onions. Here, the focus of the debate is about the external vs. the internal--fried foods represent the external hashpa'ah of the oil which gives them their flavor (no one eats raw potatoes or onions, but once they are fried in oil they too become delicious), and the hamentaschen represent the process of hashpa'ah from inside to out. (Cf. Bnei Yissaschar on the symbolism of the dreidl, with its handle from above.) Thus the real question of the hamentaschen vs. latke debate is whether spiritual growth should be centripetal or centrifugal, which would have been obscured had the debate focused on sufganiyot instead.