If you have a set of ballots:
A would be deemed best by any majority-obeying single-winner method. But if we duplicate these ballots, and turn it into a 2-winner election:
While any majority-obeying single-winner method would say (A, A2) is the right winner set when examining the individual Hare Quotas, when combining the ballots, the decision may change. The other thing is that if the A and A2 voters bullet vote, most PR methods should give the election to them; does that indicate that when generalizing a majority-obeying single-winner system to PR, “Hare-Majorities” should be given special precedence in who to elect if it allows them to prevent a bigger contender from beating them?
If the example was
then even though in the individual Hare Quotas, A and A2 would be considered best, when combined, B may be one of the two best candidates regardless of whether your PR method gives precedence to Hare majorities.