GUIs are discoverable and you can add a lot more features without needing to justify learning them all or Googling every time.

Which means they are are very well suited to true premade software, wheras CLI always seems to imply a more build it yourself approach with simpler primitives, which can take time.

GUIs also don't have to be consistent, CLIs do if they want to be easily scriptable, so you can have a lot more context sensitive stuff, confirmation prompts, etc, which increases safety.

CLIs always seem like they're pretty much digital versions or passive tools, they don't really do anything, the user does.

The usual CLI workflow seems to be "Take an input, do this thing I already thought of in my head to it, and nake this output", wheras GUIs seem to better lend themselves(for better or worse) to actually being the stage on which the thinking happens, the same way you can use a CAD even if you can't see the whole thing you want to make in your head.

Which makes GUIs amazing for occasional tasks, that one might otherwise not want to learn a whole program for, and forget by the time they need it again. I suspect that is key for allowing computers to take over as many tasks as they do.

I almost think that CLI fans seem to not do as many random assorted things on computers, and are more likely to use dedicated devices or analog/mechanical. CLI seems very well suited if a lot of your computer use is real computing, taking an input and making an output.