Editor,

A term seldom used in the current political arena is “authenticity.” According to Webster’s New World College Dictionary (4th edition), that which is “authentic” can be “believed or accepted; trustworthy; reliable.” When it comes to evaluating presidential candidates, determining which one is authentic can be a challenge for even the most discerning of voters.

In the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, determining who is the most authentic — Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders — is not just a matter of matching words with deeds, but following those words over time. Both have invaluable experience and knowledge, but only one of them has been consistent in their stance on a variety of issues.

The voter has only to look at what Bernie said in his political biography, “Outsider in the White House,” written in 1997, and updated with a new preface in 2015, to know that he has not changed his stand on the issues. This may explain why informed voters feel he can be trusted and support him.

On the other hand, only about one-third of likely voters when polled say they can trust Hillary. Could it be because her stance on key issues has flip-flopped — e.g., she was for universal healthcare before she was against it? The same was true for her stance on the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, the Keystone XL Pipeline, the Iraq War and marriage equality.

Between now and March 26, the day of the Democratic presidential caucuses in Washington State, I urge voters to learn as much as possible about the presidential choices before them. Given the high stakes in this election cycle, choosing the most authentic, trustworthy candidate is crucial and will determine America’s fate well into the future.

MARSHALL F. GOLDBERG

Oak Harbor