Without practiced responses to legitimate instances of objections, negativity or resistance (ONR), responses to it will in likelihood be inconsistent, contradictory and sometimes counterproductive.

ONR when not addressed and or negated; can fester and permanently poison the culture of the change initiative and thereby lower the likelihood of its successful implementation.
Realistically, not all instances of ONR are of equal importance or validity.

ONR issues are commonly (but by no means exclusively) raised on the basis of perception rather than fact, thereby making them subjective. However for the perceiver, perception is often 'fact'.

ONR from a customer stakeholder that spends $100 per annum is less important than the ONR issues raised by a customer that is responsible for 60% of the organisation's revenues or effort.

The ONR issues raised by the board or CEO or CFO or COO have more weight than almost any other ONR issues raised by any other stakeholder. That doesn't mean that their (or any other) ONR issues are legitimate; just that their voice has more impact and immediacy. After all, if their ONR issues are not resolved, then they can terminate a change initiative.

Although you may reasonably choose to prioritise certain ONR issues over others, be aware that even an ant-bite can cause injury. People feel particularly peeved when they get the message that what they have to say is irrelevant or unimportant. 'Small people' can have loud voices and can influence if they turn their mind to it - so ignore ONR at your peril.