In 2024, Donald Trump’s victory was powered in large part by massive gains with Latino voters. He won 48 percent of those voters that year, up from 36 percent in 2020 and 28 percent in 2016. But now, that support is plummeting; Trump’s approval rating among Latinos who voted for him recently fell from 93 percent to 66 percent, where it was at the beginning of his second term.

Why? It has a lot to do, as with everything these days, with the economy. 

It was the same in 2024. During that election, voters were experiencing rising costs and stagnant wages — the same trend that has continued until today. In 2024, though, Joe Biden and his administration — which also meant Vice President Kamala Harris — took the blame from all voters, and particularly Latinos. Today, the blame is falling on Trump. 

America, Actually host Astead Herndon caught up with Stephanie Valencia, who co-founded Equis Research, a political research firm that specializes in Latino voters, to unpack some of these recent shifts and explain them. 

“I think one important data point to understand about the Latino voter is Latinos make up more of the wage workforce than any other part or any other racial subgroup,” she said on the podcast. “And so what that means is when wages are down and inflation is high, Latinos feel it more.” 

That’s why, when the economy is bad, this group is primed to be a “swinging giant” in US politics, Valencia explains — and right now, it appears to be swinging hard against Trump. 

Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full show, so listen to America, Actually wherever you get your podcasts or watch it on Vox’s YouTube channel.

Equis has called Latinos one of the last great wild cards in American politics. Is that because of some of the double-digit swings that we’ve seen among this voting group over the past few elections?

Yes, it absolutely has to do with that. Latinos often get given the title the “sleeping giant,” which I just want to get rid of from everybody’s vocabulary. 

We should be called the “swinging giant” based on how much shift we have seen election to election. A third of Latinos consider themselves kind of independent or apolitical, and that swinging middle really is deciding every single election.

Your playbook gets into messengers and particularly how we reach folks where they are. It makes a Spanish-Spanglish distinction talking about the different types of media that Latino voters consume. 

I wanted to ask, in that vein, what’s the single biggest mistake campaigns make in terms of not reaching folks where they are?

Oh man, how long do we have so I can tell you how many mistakes? They’re really simple unforced errors. I’m going to give a very concrete and simple example that I think illustrates that. 

Look, I’m Latina. I grew up speaking mostly English, but I listen to Spanish-language radio. I watch a lot of YouTube, and on YouTube I’m watching people like Karol G and Carin León. A lot of people — a lot of Latino swing voters — have the same media consumption habits that I do.

The first problem or challenge that a lot of candidates make is they just simply translate their English ad into Spanish. And that is, to me, one of the biggest mistakes because there are a lot of things that people want to be communicating in Spanish that don’t translate word for word. There are sayings in Spanish that don’t translate directly from English or more direct ways you can communicate.

I’m sure it immediately reads Google Translate rather than an original message for said community.

Exactly. So that’s mistake No. 1. Mistake No. 2 is when they’re deploying that ad digitally, as a proxy for talking to people, they’re going to use Spanish-language browser settings. So they say, “We don’t want people who speak English to see the Spanish-language ad.”

So the way they find that set of voters is just by going to people who have Spanish-language browser settings. 

Like I said, I don’t have a Spanish-language browser setting. Everything I consume online is set in English on Chrome, but I still watch a lot of content in Spanish on YouTube.

So you’re missing a voter like me who’s going to see a Spanish language ad from a James Talarico or a Manny Rutinel and be turned on by it because I’m going to say, “Hey, that candidate’s speaking to our community. That candidate has enough respect to develop a Spanish-language ad.” 

We did some testing a couple of years ago that showed that over 70 percent of Latinos who see an ad in Spanish think that party or candidate cares more about Latinos. It matters that much.

Let’s stay in 2024 for a second longer. Your research found that Project 2025 and Trump’s mass deportation plans were not top of mind for most people, and that they were thinking about the economy. I wanted to ask about that because I remember the RNC signs at the convention saying, “Mass deportations now.” One number says that 62 percent of Latinos now think that Trump wants to deport undocumented immigrants broadly. 

Why did it take till post-election to realize those threats of mass deportation were real considering they were so front and center during his campaign?

I think this is really important for us as avid news consumers to understand the kind of news that the average voter, and especially that voter who’s coming in and out of elections, is consuming.

What they were seeing on mainstream media, perhaps even Fox News at the time, was a focus on people or Trump surrogates who said he was going to focus on serious criminals, securing the border, and violent criminals.

And so that’s what people bought. Fast-forward to 2026; the people who feel most regretful who voted for Trump in 2024 are most regretful because of immigration. They feel like there was a broken promise there. 

They were told he was going to focus on the border, which everybody agreed was chaos, and he was going to focus on violent criminals and serious threats, and at the end of the day, he has not complied with that.

And then add that to the litany of broken promises.

I’m hearing a distinction between a focus on the border, which Republicans did try to prioritize rather than the interior deportations that may have been more attributed to Stephen Miller than Donald Trump. But we have certainly seen that be a focus of the administration once they came back into office.

You mentioned the shift that has happened since 2024, and that’s really important, of course. Trump’s approval rating with Latinos is now worse than with non-Latinos, a stunning reversal in 18 months. 

You mentioned the factors that have contributed there, but is this really just the economy?

It’s the economy, it’s the war, and it’s immigration. It’s those three things. 

One thing that is really interesting to note about Trump’s approval, other than that it’s at basement levels — and he’s very much pulled down the GOP with him broadly and with Latino voters — is that in Trump 1.0, his approval on the economy and the cost of living was actually better than his everyday approval on his total job.

And he has been underwater with Latinos almost this entire term so far on the cost of living and the economy. It’s almost been a complete and total reversal.

Listen, you tell people you’re going to fix egg prices and gas is going to go down, and then you do the opposite, and we’re hearing that story universally across different electorate groups. 

You’re saying that’s still the main story when it comes to Latinos also?

Yes, it’s still the main story. I think one important data point to understand about the Latino voter is Latinos make up more of the wage workforce than any other part or any other racial subgroup. What that means is when wages are down and inflation is high, Latinos feel it more. 

We have less savings. We have lower rates of home ownership. So the safety nets that other people might have, we just don’t have. 

That really has exacerbated the kind of impact that people are feeling right now as they’re trying to make ends meet.

You mentioned the exponential growth in the terms of people who now regret or are disappointed with their vote for Donald Trump. Does that mean a preference for Democrats? How should we think about the binary choice between D and R versus what is a clear story about a backlash to Donald Trump’s actions?

I think it is a huge mistake for Democrats to rest on their laurels and think that because of what people are feeling about Trump and Republicans and the sense of disappointment and promises broken that that is automatically going to translate for them as a party and as a brand.

Right now, the Democratic brand has suffered a repeated set of blows among Latino voters. Twenty years of comprehensive immigration reform hasn’t been delivered. It’s a thing that comes up in almost every focus group. 

And part of what the build-up to 2024 was, was not only 20 years of a promise undelivered; it was the chaos at the border, it was feeling like Democrats were focused on everything but Latinos and their families, or everyday Americans and their families, and that they had lost that thread.

Last month, Florida state Rep. Angie Nixon won the state’s Democratic Senate nomination in a major upset over her better-funded opponent, retired Army Lt. Col. Alex Vindman. Her victory was quickly slotted into a narrative about the Democratic Party’s insurgent progressive movement, which has triumphed in House and Senate primaries in Michigan, Colorado, New York, and elsewhere. 

But while Nixon supports progressive policies, she argues there’s more to the story than a simple progressive-versus-centrist tale. She says that she out-worked and out-organized her opponent — and that Floridians across the political spectrum are hungry for change. 

Vox’s Astead Herndon invited Nixon on a special pop-up episode of America, Actually to break down how she won the nomination, why she thinks there’s a path to victory in what many analysts believe is a solidly red state, and what she wants to get done as a senator if she prevails in November.

Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full show, so listen to America, Actually wherever you get your podcasts or watch it on Vox’s YouTube channel.

Why do you think your victory took so many by surprise?

It took so many by surprise because people both tend to underestimate a Black woman — especially a progressive Black woman in politics — and then one who wasn’t able to raise as much money. But as a former single mom for 12 years, I know how to make a dollar stretch.

This win is attributed to good old-fashioned grassroots organizing. I am a former union organizer. I am a community organizer, and I know the importance of people power and talking to people and getting them energized about why they should vote and why they should see themselves in this country.

How much would you ascribe your win to the type of politics that you’re describing here versus the progressive policies that you championed? Should we take this as a sign that Medicare-for-all and “abolish ICE” have strong support in Florida?

It’s all of it, right? It is the hard work that we put into this race to raise awareness about who I am and the policies and positions that I stand for, which are policies and positions that the majority of hardworking, everyday people stand for. 

Just because we want access to quality healthcare and affordable housing and fully funded public schools, they try to fear-monger and make it seem as though we are communist and we’re not.

We are not communist. We are people who want to put hardworking, everyday people in power so that they can determine and shape what our communities look like and what our economies look like. There’s nothing radical or extreme about that.

Democrats are still dismissing your chances to win a general election. Prominent pundits have said that Democrats should not invest in Florida, and that would amount to wasted money. Political forecasters moved the race in the Republican direction after your primary victory, arguing that the progressive politics makes it easier for Republicans to win in a state like Florida.

I wanted to ask about electability. Can you give me the case for how you can win a statewide race amongst such skepticism? 

The same way that I was able to win a primary being outspent and out-raised 18 to 1. I am building a very unique, diverse coalition of people. We’ve had Republicans and independents that crossed over in the primary to vote for me in the primary. They also volunteer in our campaign. They’ve made donations. 

We literally have a bunch of Republicans and libertarians who have been stating that they are voting for me because they like that I am no-nonsense. They appreciate that I am trying to put a check on what is coming out of Washington, DC, all of the cruelty and the corruption, and that is the winning message.

Look, we’re up against a woman, [incumbent Republican Sen. Ashley Moody], who allowed the theft of $10 million. She allowed money to be stolen from medically needy and low-income kids, to be diverted toward two citizen-led ballot initiatives that actually caused us to not have better health in our communities. 

People are frustrated, and that’s all Ashley Moody has done — just look out for herself, her campaign donors and these billionaires. People are ready for elected officials to stop bailing out these big businesses [and] actually look out for everyday people.

In November 2023, you introduced a resolution to the Florida House calling for “the immediate de-escalation and ceasefire…in Israel and occupied Palestine.” It was rejected 104 to 2. And it earned you some bad blood with some of the members of the Florida Jewish Caucus. The chair actually said that the resolution was born out of ignorance and antisemitism.

Obviously, the Democratic Party base has shifted on that issue over the last several years. There’s been an open discussion about whether Joe Biden and Kamala Harris did themselves damage in the 2024 election by not breaking more explicitly with Israel’s actions in Gaza.

Do you think that was a mistake for Democrats?

I would say yes. I would say that we have to have really uncomfortable conversations amongst our different communities and we just have to talk. But I feel that they did do a disservice in regards to just going along with the AIPAC lobby.

You had mentioned that you don’t support sending any money or any weapons to Israel at this moment, but I also wanted to ask about things like BDS, the movement to boycott, divest, or sanction Israel. Is that something you support?

It is. I’m a Black woman who is a descendant of slaves, and who is the descendant of people from the civil rights movement, and I know how we used boycotts and we used protest to gain our civil rights for our community. So I’m fully supportive of that.

You repeatedly said that you don’t support defunding the police on your website. It says that you support demilitarizing the police. And that “real safety comes from good jobs, strong schools, affordable housing, and healthcare for all — not from more cameras, more cages, and more agents.”

What is the difference between that and defunding?

Whatever folks think the difference is. I’m not going to box myself in because I understand how they’ll try to cut and clip things with me saying certain words.

But doesn’t that sound a little bit like lessening the resources that go to police to focus on other things? I mean, that sounds a little like the same thing.

It sounds like I know that is my position. I want to defund Flock cameras because bad cops are stalking their ex-girlfriends and ex-boyfriends. And so to-may-toe, to-mah-toe. I literally said this before and that is what I am for. I’m not trying to get clipped in any kind of way.

Let me ask you this way. I appreciate the focus on root causes, and I think you’ve laid that out that that’s where you want the energy to go — that real public safety comes from focusing on the things that cause people to commit crimes in the first place, but those often take a long time to show effect.

If we’re talking about the root causes of crime, what is the message to someone whose community is unsafe right now that does not include policing?

What I would say is, making sure that we invest in making sure people have more jobs and we invest in community control of the police. I totally believe in civil review boards and that type of thing, but I believe in making sure that people’s most basic needs are met. 

One of the things that I believe could help that right off the bat is things like universal healthcare, or at a minimum, extending the ACA subsidies so that we can drive down these healthcare premium costs. Or fully funding these programs that allow people to have access to first-time homebuyer programs. 

I was a single mom for 12 years, and I took part in the first-time homebuyer program that was funded from the federal government. That trickled down to the state and then to the local government. That helped me with down payment assistance as well as closing costs and those types of programs. We need to put policies in place that are allowing people to be good.

We need to push for universal child care. For every $1 that is invested by the government, it puts $3 back into the economy so parents can get to work. They can be able to make sure that they have money to put their children in different programs. We need to invest in programs to keep our children off the streets.

There’s been so much effort to put you in one of the boxes that have defined the Democratic ideological battles — DSA versus establishment. I hear in this interview how that doesn’t neatly fit with what it seems like you’ve done in Florida. 

Where do you think this campaign fits into the ongoing question of where do Democrats go next?

We’re coalition builders, we’re aggregators. Folks should know, I was a vice chair of a local Democratic Party. I was also the field director and the political director with the state party. I have never fit in a box. I was a union member and I also led a statewide organization that was straight-up progressive.

We need all these things to fight back against this Donald Trump regime. Look, this man is not going to leave willingly in 2028. He’s created a paramilitary force in the form of ICE that is getting away with shooting people and slaughtering them on camera while they’re masked without any accountability. They’re pushing to see how far they can go.

Granted, Black people have been getting slaughtered on camera without accountability for a while, but now they are doing it to people who aren’t just Black, who aren’t just Latino. They are banking on us being normalized with what’s happening.

First lady Michelle Obama says, “They go low, we go high.” I’m saying, “We get loud, we push back. We organize stronger and harder so that we can win and change this country and build a new vision for the next 250 years, where we have a Florida and an America for all.”

Retro-Gamer-Autorin Nina Schild begann schon in frühen Jahren, Adventures zu spielen – sie lernte Lesen mit Maniac Mansion und fing an, nackte Frauen zu malen, nachdem sie als kleines Kind Leisure Suit Larry spielte. Ihr Mann erteilt ihr beim gemeinsamen Adventure-Spielen Redeverbot, da sie sonst selbst die abstrusesten Rätsel in Rekordzeit löst und ihm den Spaß kaputtmacht. Diese und etliche mehr Enthüllungen findet ihr in Hardy Heßdörers Gespräch mit Nina auf der Gamescom 2026:

After 12 years of dominating American politics — either as president, as a candidate, or from the sidelines — Donald Trump will finally exit the stage in 2028, and it’s anybody’s guess what will come next. But one thing we do know is that Gen Z, many of whom were children during Trump’s first campaign, will play a large role in shaping that future.

What’s less clear is what direction they might choose or what their politics are in the first place.

We do know a few things, thanks to a Vox collaboration with the polling firm Murmuration. For one, they’re highly independent: Almost 30 percent answered “none of the above” when they were asked to choose their political label in Murmuration’s survey. They’re an economically insecure cohort, at least for now; Murmuration found that only 28 percent of respondents between the ages of 18 and 30 said they could cover an unexpected expense of $500. And they had the largest gender gap of any age group when it came to supporting the Democratic presidential nominee in 2024 — women preferred Kamala Harris by 17 percentage points over men.

To find out more, Vox’s Astead Herndon spoke with Gen Z researcher Rachel Janfaza for a recent episode of America, Actually. They discussed the group’s political identities, preferences, and top issues, and what that all could mean for politics going forward. They discussed an important distinction between two versions of Gen Z, and whether its infamous gender gap is shifting. They also touched on how, contrary to seemingly everyone else, Gen Z is hope-maxxing.

Below is an excerpt of Astead’s conversation with Janfaza, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full show, so listen to America, Actually wherever you get your podcasts or watch it on Vox’s YouTube channel.

You’ve done a lot of work around the different Gen Zs. I’ve heard you talk about Gen Z 1 versus Gen Z 2. How would we describe those differences?

I call this the theory of the two Gen Zs. I really started to cultivate it doing focus groups with young people in 2022, hearing the way that high school students at the time and college students at the time just had a different outlook, and I realized that those who had graduated high school before the start of the pandemic, those Gen Z-ers, just had a different worldview than the younger half of Gen Z, who were still in high school at the time that the pandemic hit.

And that is because of the taste of independence that people on the older cusp of Gen Z had prior to the lockdown situation. Anyone who is between roughly 29 and 22, I would say, is Gen Z 1.0, and anyone younger than that would be Gen Z 2.0.

And there’s no official end date to Gen Z right now. Like, it’s sort of 1997 to 2012, so it’s not very clear yet.

Can you just name for me what the difference was between the generations? How did that shape a different form of politics?

Gen Z 1.0 really came of age during Trump’s first term in office. This was a new phenomenon. He was breaking down past barriers, and we saw a lot of youth-led activism in response to actions or inaction from the first Trump administration.

You saw things like the March for Our Lives and climate strikes and the Black Lives Matter movement. And there was this very real sense that, you know, if we protest and demand change, perhaps there could be a difference.

Whereas Gen Z 2.0 came of age during the Biden era. This was a post-Covid sort of upbringing. And they really grew resistant to authority because they saw Democrats in charge during the time when kids went back to school and when there were things like mask mandates and vaccine mandates, especially in blue areas across the country where Democrats were handling the way that schools were reopening.

Young people whose lives and childhoods were on the line felt like they were guinea pigs in an experiment that they didn’t sign up for, and I think this is when we saw a movement away from Democrats. I don’t necessarily think that was toward Republicans.

Trump capitalized on this in 2024. Broadly speaking, Gen Z 2.0 is far less trusting of authority and institutions, far more independent. They hate labels, and this isn’t just political. They hate labels when it comes to gender, their relationships. No one wants to be boxed in. I hear this all the time in my focus groups, and so they just moved away from both parties writ large.

I also want to ask a couple of questions specifically about the gender divide, because that was such a big topic in the 2024 election.

We heard at that time, and I reported on, the change among young men that we saw manifested in that race. There was a 17-point gap between the votes of Gen Z men and Gen Z women. Before we get to where we are now, what do you think drove that gap?

No. The easy thing to say is it’s the algorithm, but that’s not the whole picture. I think a lot of young women felt like their bodily autonomy, freedom, rights were on the line. And a lot of young men care about that, but when I asked them, “What’s the top issue in the 2024 election?” few said abortion. They were like, “I care about that, but that’s not an issue that personally affects me.” And so I think that’s sort of what it came down to.

Women literally felt like it was their futures that were in question. And when you talk about the gender gap, you noted that young men shifted to the right, and that’s of course true.

Young women, since 2017, have remarkably moved to the left. And there have been a number of different causes to that, but every time there’s been a social wedge issue, whether it was early with immigration during Trump’s first term, the MeToo movement, the conversation about reproductive healthcare access and the fall of Roe v. Wade and the Dobbs decision … there have been so many examples of things that have pushed women further to the left, and then also a frustration with the way that Trump talks about women or accusations that have been made against him.

This is part of what I think makes this political period for Gen Z so fascinating. The Trump era will shape history across every generation, but Gen Z are the ones whose ideology was forming. And so there was this real sisterhood that emerged between young women during this time, where both on social media and in person, they were finding camaraderie around this shared fear for their future, but also appreciation of their individual rights and freedoms.

And young men didn’t see that same sort of bonding happening. And we talked a lot in 2024 about how Democrats had a problem with young men because they weren’t actively reaching out to young men. I’m the first person to say that Democrats really screwed that up, and that was a problem. But I think that there were not shared spaces for young men to come together in that way as there were for young women. I think that was part of what has driven this gap as well.

Should we update our thinking, though, of that gender divide from then to now? Like, are we still seeing the same big gaps between voting and political behavior from Gen Z men and women?

No. So largely, when I ask young people about the gender gap, they acknowledge that it exists, but they don’t like it. They don’t want to be stuck in this divide. Gen Z wants out of the gender war. They do.

We’re also now seeing a generation unite around a new set of issues that are pretty communal, that everyone can kind of agree upon. There’s a new shared set of issues that are less gendered and more affecting everybody.

AI? What are you talking about?

AI and the economy. Gen Z now agrees that the two main issues are AI and the economy. And obviously those are related.

I see this. You’re saying the gender gap among young people was at its peak because the parties were positioning themselves on gendered lines as well. And now, because of the consensus about issues that touch everyone, mainly the economy and AI, it’s a little bit of a permission structure to put the knives down in the gender fight because everyone’s lives are affected by this.

I think a lot of the gender war in the first place was kind of manufactured by people who were talking about Gen Z and not to them. You had the main candidates for president playing into that, too, and it was a man versus a woman, and it was kind of like, “These are your two options.” And we’re far past that.

I’ve talked about how Gen Z is hope-maxxing. You can say, “Oh, like it’s giving Obama,” but they really are looking for something to feel excited about. It’s enough of the doom and gloom. Growing up in this era has been exhausting.

The division and the vitriol isn’t fun for anyone. And maybe it’s the hopeless optimist in me, but I think that there is a real appetite for a post-Trumpian era of politics that is just less toxic. And that feels more hopeful and gives you something to rally around and unite around, rather than to be divided.

 

Jahrzehnte nach dem Original hat Inin das Remaster Apidya Specal herausgebracht. Programmiert hat es Stefan Becker, und den hat Jörg Langer auf der Gamescom 2026 am Retro-Gamer-Stand interviewt. Viel Spaß mit dem kompakten Eindruck zur Entstehung sowie der Frage, wieso, bei allen Verbesserungen, keine Rückspulfunktion enthalten ist.

Am Stand von Retro Gamer kommen Vorserienmodelle des neuen Joysticks von OSA-Stick.com zum Einsatz. Und wenn doch mal eine Mikroschalter den Geist aufgibt, ist (zumindest auf der Gamescom) der Entwickler der OSA-Sticks, Frank Niggemann, nicht weit, und repariert das Ding in 3 Minuten…

Ein witziges Fundstück von der Gamescom 2026: Factor-Five-Urgestein Willi Bäcker zeigt Retro Gamer einen Bug/Cheat in der Mega-Drive-Version von Turrican, den er erst kürzlich entdeckt hat. Er sei “zu 98% reproduzierbar”, erklärt er uns dann noch off-camera.  Im kurzen Video seht ihr den Bug, und wie er per Smartbomb an der richtigen Stelle erzeugt wird.

In regelmäßigen Abständen gilt: Retro-Gamer-Leser fragen (vor allem auf unseren Social-Media-Kanälen), und Retro-Gamer-Autoren antworten. Dieses Mal sind das Hardy Heßdörfer und Jörg Langer: Willkommen also zu unserer neuesten Q&A-Runde, das wir dieses Mal auf der Gamescom 2026 aufgenommen haben!

Auf der Gamescom 2026 hatten wir unseren GamersGlobal- und RetroGamer-Autoren Michael Hengst am Stand – ein Urgestein des deutschen Spielejournalismus. Mit Jörg Langer redet er unter anderem darüber, wieso er von der Branche enttäuscht ist und dies seine allerletzte Gamescom sein wird. Viel Spaß beim Ansehen!

Passend zum großen Evolution-Artikel in Retro Gamer 4/26 namens Die Chroniken von Zelda führt euch Hardy Heßdörfer in diesem rund 20-minütigen Video launig durch alle Serienteile der ruhmreichen Action-RPG-Serie.

 

Sollte oben bei euch eine Fehlermeldung stehen statt das Video (ein Problem des Safari-Browsers), klickt einfach auf “Video auf YouTube ansehen”. Viel Spaß!

Last week, I discussed the miniDSP UMIK-2 USB measurement microphone and as I mentioned then, it's not often that we see much discussion about these devices among audiophiles even though they are important in helping us chase down sonic problems and of course to calibrate the sound system. To me, that calibration process is an essential part of achieving a truly "accurate" sound system once we

Liebe Retrofreunde, entweder zum Anfixen geeignet, wenn ihr das Heft noch nicht habt, oder aber zum gemütlichen Mitlesen: Egal wie ihr unser regelmäßiges Heftblättern nutzt, wünschen euch Anatol und Jörg ebenso viel Spaß beim Zusehen, wie wir bei der Aufnahme hatten! Wer das Heft als ePaper oder Einzelheft bestellen möchte, wird im Shop fündig.

Das Video ist nur leicht geschnitten und damit 53 Minuten lang, aber wir wollen ja nicht durchhetzen. Also zieht euch ein frisches Bier oder einen Tee oder einen Kaffee oder ein Glas Rotwein oder was auch immer ihr gerne trinkt (wir akzeptieren auch kristallaktiviertes Wasser) und macht es euch gemütlich

 

Solltet ihr oben eine Fehlermeldung bekommen statt das Video zum Abspielen (das ist browserabhängig), klickt einfach auf “Video auf YouTube ansehen”.

Im aktuellen Heft Retro Gamer 2/26 haben wir einen vierseitigen Praxistest zum Commodore 64 Ultimate – hier ist das zugehörige Video, in dem euch Jörg Langer knapp 20 Minuten lang den Wunder-Brotkasten vorführt. Viel Spaß!

Sollte statt des Videos bei euch eine Fehlermeldung erscheinen hier drunter, klickt bitte beherzt auf “Video auf YouTube ansehen”.

 

Manchmal dauert es etwas länger, und so ist der in diesem Heftblättern besprochene Retro Gamer 1/26 bereits rund zehn Wochen im Handel (und fast elf bei den Abonnenten). Aber dafür haben wir einen ganz besonderen Partner für Jörg Langer dieses Mal: Spielejournalisten-Urgestein Roland Austinat, der eigentlich in San Francisco lebt und demzufolge eher selten in der Redaktion vorbei kommen kann. Viel Spaß!

Falls ihr im folgenden die Meldung “Fehler 153” seht (das hängt von eurem Browser ab), klickt bitte einfach auf den großen Link “Video auf YouTube ansehen”.

 

Eine knappe Stunde lang blättern Hardy Heßdörfer und Jörg Langer für euch im Retro-Gamer-Sonderheft Die 90er Jahre – das über 150 aktuelle Spieletests von 90er-Klassikern enthält. Das Heft war im Retro-Gamer-Shop direkt zum Start ausverkauft im Dezember 2025, in der Woche vom 5.1.26 wird die 2. Auflage gedruckt und ab 12.1.26 verschickt. Wer bislang kein Heft abbekommen hat, kann es nun wieder im Shop bestellen.

Viel Spaß mit dem Video (in manchen Browsern kommt unten eine Fehlermeldung – in dem Fall bitte einfach „auf YouTube ansehen“ anklicken):

Zunächst wünsche ich Euch einen schönen 2. Advent 🙂 .

Es gab nun schon länger keine Brot-Videos mehr von mir. Das hat zeitliche Gründe, denn ähnlich den Fotodokumentationen und dem Verfassen von Blog Artikeln steckt hinter einem gut geschnittenen und editierten Video eine Menge Arbeit.

Vor zwei Wochen war ich in Leverkusen und konnte als neuer Experte beim Youtube-Kanal „Brot – Kongress“ auftreten. Entstanden sind drei Videos, zwei davon mit meinen aktuellsten Rezepten. Gemeinsam mit Michaela Emundts backe ich die türkischen Sesamringe „Simit“ und das „Dinkel-Sylter.

Simit

Dinkel-Sylter

Video Nr. 3 über das Vierkornbrot aus dem Buch „Heimatbrote“ ist noch nicht erschienen. Ich ergänze es dann später.

Ich hoffe Euch gefallen die Videos und tragen dazu bei, die Rezeptbeschreibungen noch etwas besser zu verstehen.

Euer Doc!

The post Neue Videos appeared first on der brotdoc.