This points out that the students might not prefer Hall Dining to the current vendor. If they thought other alternatives were available, they might have preferred other alternatives to the current vendor. But they might have preferred the current vendor over Hall Dining.

We have no reason to believe that the survey involved an unrepresentative sample of students.

The author stated that preferences of most students should be adhered to, “all other things being equal.” This acknowledges that there can be other factors that are relevant. The argument is concerned with what we should do if those other factors are held equal.

The author doesn’t overlook the possibility that there is disagreement among students concerning this issue. The author states that “most” students prefer replacing the current vendor. This acknowledges that there might be some students who disagree and prefer the current vendor.

The recomm. to hire Hall Dining is not based “only” on the popularity of this decision. The author provides premises that aren’t related to popularity (such as the fact Hall Dining is the only alternative,) Also, the premises do not state that hiring Hall Dining would be popular.