9. IRV more accurately reflects each voter’s will correction

There are two sides to a voter’s "will" in a single seat election with more than two candidates. The first is that which the voter most wants, a favorite candidate, and may be called "sympathy." The second is that which the voter most dreads, a candidate the voter wishes to defeat, and may be called "antipathy." Under our current system some voters can roll their sympathy and antipathy into a single vote for a favorite candidate. However, other voters are limited to expressing only one side of their "will," and must choose. We don't know which aspect of the voters’ "will" voters are expressing. Did voters really like candidate A, or did they feel forced into voting for A even though they preferred B, because they believed a vote for B would serve to help elect candidate C, due to splitting the vote? IRV frees all voters to fully and honestly express their honest will, both as to what they really want and what they will settle for, to avoid getting what they loathe. By so doing, IRV more accurately reflects the collective voters’ will, with a decision that fully incorporates both voters’ sympathy and antipathy.