The pentagon is table stakes - everyone has something there. If you’re trying to demonstrate commitment, you invest in the hinterlands... and if you’re trying to justify a decision that otherwise is a deadlock that’s maybe where you find the tie-breakers.
I’m not sure why you’re being downvoted as the point you’re bringing up is a legitimate one.
If the assessment of 2 vendors finds them equal in most regards wrt the requirements, that’s when you look at somewhat unrelated factors to make the call. In this case, it’s entirely plausible that the DoD considered the fact that MSFT would be pliable to their concerns as a deciding factor.
