How to Build Resilience in 2026

Thank you for doing this. It's so nice to see you. We started talking about this master class you sat down for—it's no light lift. I watched all 16 episodes. What appealed to you about this idea?

When I was approached, I had watched a few master classes and was taken with those telling you how to do something, like how to write or cook. They asked me to talk about why I've done what I've done throughout my life, how I overcame setbacks, and became resilient. I have a lot of experience with that. My life has been covered in sound bites and images, and this was a chance to get behind all that, to talk about the why—why would anybody, and in particular why would I, go into public service and politics? I've always believed a life well-lived includes service to others. This class gave me a chance to answer questions, talk about growing up and challenges, and break through to talk to people directly. It was an amazing experience.

You really get into your childhood to present day. Was there anything you didn't want to talk about?

I said here it is. As I understand how master class is consumed, people turn in for advice and to hear from people in the public eye to pick up hints—what to do, what not to do. I couldn't have done a master class filmed over three and a half days without being completely open. I'm here, you can ask me whatever.

Was there catharsis for you, a chance to correct the record?

It did feel cathartic, an intensely personal experience. Often people say, "You're not what I thought." For many who will never meet me, the only way they'll know me is through the media. This was a chance to be myself and let people behind the curtain.

You talk about criticism over your career. How do you make your story relatable to average people facing resilience challenges?

I wanted to ground what I was talking about in what people might know from headlines, both ups and downs, into the nitty-gritty. Not everybody will make a speech in front of millions, but nearly everybody will have to get over the fear of public speaking. Or setbacks when treated unfairly—how do you respond? It was part of my goal to root it in experiences on the international stage that are part of most people's professional or public life. The master class team, predominantly younger, would respond, "Oh my gosh, I never thought of it that way." I felt I could connect my experience with theirs.

How do you deal with harsh criticism, like calls to be locked up during a campaign?

I learned over many years. Everybody's going to criticize you; it's part of the human experience. I learned to take criticism seriously but not personally. Sometimes critics give good insight—you may not want to hear it, but you have to listen. But if you allow it to be a personal attack, it tears you down. Taking it seriously means appreciating the source. Outrageous attacks motivated by those wanting to tear me down can be dismissed. "Lock her up" was absurd and dangerous—we live in a society governed by rule of law. But if someone says I could have explained something better, I take that on board. If people don't shrink from criticism, understand where it's coming from, evaluate it, take it seriously where meant, and not take it personally, they can withstand a lot.

That's hard for some people—the instinct is to be defensive.

I haven't always done it perfectly. Sometimes it's so outrageous or mean-spirited, you get shaken. But if you have a system so you don't get knocked to your knees, you can get up. I know people devastated by criticism, often young women who haven't had experience dealing with mean-spirited comments. Now criticism is amplified online, magnified because hundreds of thousands or millions see it. Social media has made potentially everybody a target. It breaks my heart to see bullying directed at young people. There's a correlation between social media use and increased anxiety and depression in young people. If I can help equip people to deal with inevitable criticism in real life or online, I'll be happy.

As parents of a 14-year-old girl, we see the damage. What do we do?

Admit there's a big problem. Thanks to whistleblowers and investigative media, we see Facebook and Instagram have known their algorithms drive people toward conspiracy and disinformation, impacting young kids. They persist, even wanting an Instagram for children aged 5 to 11. We're conducting a massive experiment on our children. Technology has downsides. Algorithms are meant to addict us, affecting kids whose brains aren't fully formed until age 25. If caught in a negative loop online, it's hard at 14 or 15 to deal with it. We need to regulate better—I hope the administration and Congress look at that. We need to better equip our kids with media literacy: how do you know what's true? Double down on that in schools and families. If someone says something bad in person, ask why—often it's more about them. Online, when anonymous or repetitive, it's harder. That's part of my master class message: building resilience in yourself and young people. I worry we're out of control. The impact on brains is something we must address as parents and policymakers. The impact extends from conspiracy theories about vaccines to elections, all designed to attract eyeballs.

You talk about setbacks, like the 1993 healthcare reform task force. What did you learn?

It was an incredible learning experience and a devastating setback. I learned that putting me, as first lady, in charge made me a lightning rod, making it difficult for people to get beyond that. Secondly, we thought we could change how people got insurance, later seen with the Affordable Care Act, but we had to reform the insurance industry and handle drug prices. We ran numbers showing how reform would save businesses, families, and government money. CEOs would say it sounded good, then back off within 72 hours because people were scared of change, even if it improved their condition. We weren't going for single-payer; we knew that wouldn't see the light of day politically. We aimed for universal coverage by getting everybody into the system. Ads like Harry and Louise positioned it as too risky. We weren't successful. But out of that, I worked on bipartisan legislation that became the Children's Health Insurance Program, providing healthcare for about 10 million kids a year.

Was the lesson to take it piece by piece?

That's how I see political change in America right now. There's so much pent-up support and opposition to change. I ran a primary campaign in 2016 about single-payer versus getting everybody covered. In 2008, Senator Obama and I disagreed—I said you need a mandate; he said no. He ended up having one; the Supreme Court threw it out. It's back and forth to expand benefits. What President Biden is trying to do is consequential incremental change. With the infrastructure bill, we've talked about infrastructure for 25 years; finally, we have a bill. With Build Back Better, things like childcare and paid family leave are economic necessities.

Should they take pieces like childcare and pass them separately?

Given where we are now, and how much has been cut from the bill—it started at $3.5 trillion—the pieces left from House negotiation are a good indicator. What's in the bill now can be explained and defended. I hope something comes out of the Senate before Christmas. There are important needs in families and climate change. Negotiating in public is challenging—people get hopes up, dashed, disgusted. I've been in closed-door meetings arguing about bills. That's how democracy works. For climate change, what's in these bills is critically important for lowering emissions and mitigating effects. Parts of Alaska are devastated; there's flooding in Miami Beach. I hope it comes to pass.

There's consternation about the Democratic Party—too progressive? What's the state?

It's a time for careful thinking about what wins elections, not just in deep blue districts. After redistricting, Republicans are eliminating competitive seats. We must be clear-eyed about holding the House and Senate in 2022 and winning the electoral college. Republicans are creating an environment where winning narrowly, like Biden did, will be out of reach. I understand people want to argue for priorities, but nothing gets done without a Democratic majority. Our majority comes from winning in difficult districts and purplish states. I'm all about vigorous debate, but it means nothing without a Congress that gets things done and a sane White House. In Virginia and New Jersey, lessons: turnout went up, but the other side's vote went up more. We need to understand motivations for Democratic voters. There's a pattern: when Bill became president and pushed through changes, he lost Congress two years later. When Obama came in after the financial crisis, pushed through ACA, the 2010 midterm wasn't good. Democrats get elected to fix things; fixing things is hard and creates dissonance. Biden was the candidate most likely to defeat Trump, focused on safe hands. His popular vote margin was enormous, but electoral vote margin not much bigger than my loss. Numbers are hard. In an ecosystem where lies are currency, from Fox News to social media, lies never end. In Virginia, after schools closed, people focused on education. Democrats didn't understand how disoriented moms were. Critical race theory was a stalking horse for anxiety. The other side revved it up. The real concern should have been addressed: it's been a hard year, here's what I'll do. It's hard to compete on social media with accomplishments. How do you market helping people against a tsunami of attacks? Democrats must figure out a better way, like Biden with infrastructure bill events.

In the master class, you read the would-be victory speech from November 8, 2016. Why?

MasterClass asked me. I wanted to be helpful. I didn't write a concession speech; I thought we could pull it out. The speech emphasized my mother's journey—she was put on a train at age eight with her sister, abandoned. My work for kids was motivated by her life. Reading it was emotional, bringing back the loss. At the end, I talk about envisioning her on the train, going back to tell her it would be okay. It reflected what I care about and who I am.

Did it feel good? People say they've never seen that level of public emotion from you.

When you're a woman in public life trying to break barriers, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. Showing emotion may connect with some, but for many, it's a disqualification. Women like Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel—you don't see much emotion. I've talked with Merkel; it's hard. You want to convey emotion, but it can be mercilessly received. In the second debate, Trump was stalking me. I was thinking about the psychological gamesmanship. Do I pivot and say, "Back up, you creep"? Do I make a joke? How would that be received? No woman's ever been in that office. A minority still don't see a woman there. Women who ran in 2020 didn't win a caucus or state. It's hard. I decided to ignore him, stick to my case. Was that right? Who knows? It was a first-time decision. I hope viewers get that my experiences are rooted in everyday people's, especially women's experiences—being looked up and down, told to get coffee, ideas ignored. If I can help someone think through what to do, sometimes humor works, sometimes pushing back. Lilly Ledbetter fought for equal pay; she didn't get it but paved the way for millions. Sometimes being first opens the door for others.

In that speech, you were gracious to Trump, calling for unity. How painful to watch the opposite?

The last four years were incredibly difficult. In my concession speech, I hoped for the best from Trump. At the inauguration, his speech had no grace notes. He abused the office, from the Muslim ban to trying to overturn the election. He's so outrageous it's hard for people to believe what they see. He's still trying to overturn an election with no basis in law or fact. The Republican Party has gone along. People I served with have no spine. We're seeing a party taken over by a demagogue. We must fight back against efforts to undermine elections. After January 6, the House committees are investigating, but there's no sense of duty from many Trump workers. I'm worried. It didn't end with his defeat. There have been relentless attacks on Biden from day one. It's time to decide if we're a grown-up country. Standing up means supporting those modeling sensible leadership.

What could happen if it's not just one man?

We have to keep stripping away the facade. Some can't stand him but are scared of their base. Few show courage; many are quitting. They won't even come on shows to be asked. We need a drumbeat against Fox News, which has been an instrument for destruction. Rupert Murdoch got vaccinated but spreads lies. It's hypocritical and dangerous. Call them out. Two journalists quit over Tucker Carlson's coverage of Kyle Rittenhouse. We must manage the tsunami of false information. Top Facebook feeds are right-wing propaganda. We're not competing effectively. We must tell the truth in a more impactful way. Trump will likely run again. If not held accountable, he could squeak through with hand-picked election officials. That could be the end of our democracy. If he or someone like him is elected with a compliant Congress, you won't recognize our country. Corruption affects everybody. It's a terrifying prospect.

Given what Trump unleashed, do you feel responsibility or guilt?

Of course. I tried to warn people. I think but for Jim Comey's stunt 10 days before the election, I would have won. There's evidence: in Philadelphia suburbs, I was 33 points ahead, then lost 18 points. Women were coming around, then said they couldn't. I feel terrible about not winning, not stopping him. But now everybody can see what kind of leader he is. He got more votes in 2020. Some liked what they saw. He's trying to set it up so it happens again.

How does being outside help with resilience?

Walking in the woods keeps me sane. After the 2016 election, going into the woods was deeply restorative. Being outside is something I want to do more of.

What did people say to you after the election?

They would cry, say they were sorry, they worked hard, or they didn't vote. It was touching. Many still struggle with that election because of what came after.

In your concession speech, you told young women and girls not to give up hope. Why?

I had so many young girls and women at rallies, in pantsuits. I didn't want them discouraged from pursuing dreams. Things worth fighting for, even if you don't win, you still have to care and make a difference. I wanted to convey that at a low moment.

Do you think we'll see a woman president?

I sure hope so. We have to make it happen. It's not easy. We must push back on caricatures and unfair assumptions in media coverage and public perception.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.