AMNA NAWAZ: This week's shooting in Maine has put another spotlight on America's gun violence epidemic.

On that and more, we turn now to the analysis of Brooks and Capehart.

That's New York Times columnist David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart, associate editor for The Washington Post.

Welcome to you both gentlemen.

Good to see you.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Hey, Amna.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, Lewiston, Maine, now the latest community to suffer mass gun violence.

The question, the conversation we always have, what will this change?

What changes now?

We did see one lawmaker come out with a remarkable reversal.

I want to play for anyone who missed this piece of sound from Democratic Republican (sic) Jared Golden, who reversed his position on assault weapons bans right after the shooting.

Take a listen.

REP. JARED GOLDEN (D-ME): I have opposed efforts to ban deadly weapons of war, like the assault rifle used to carry out this crime.

The time has now come for me to take responsibility for this failure, which is why I now call on the United States Congress to ban assault rifles, like the one used by the sick perpetrator of this mass killing in my hometown of Lewiston, Maine.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, this was a remarkable reversal, and very fast.

Why do you think we saw that?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: I think we saw that because that congressman now has a situation in his hometown, in his backyard, that communities around the country have been dealing with for years now.

I don't know if his one lone voice is going to be that part of the wave and the momentum that is needed to turn into law what he called for, and that is an assault weapons ban.

And, listen, he is there in Maine, which has very loose gun laws.

Lots of people have guns.

It's a rural state.

I understand the traditions there in Maine.

And yet I still -- unfortunately the people of Lewiston are now grappling with the fact that a weapon of war, not a weapon of animal hunting, that, at this point, these weapons have been used to hunt people, and they are lethal.

And there is nothing that is being done at the federal level to ensure that anyone -- or to ensure that no one gets their hands on a weapon of war, let alone someone as -- someone like the alleged shooter, who apparently and allegedly had mental health issues.

This is something -- look, I -- Amna, when those children, those babies were slaughtered in Newtown and nothing happened after that, that's all I needed to know about the will of American legislators, federal legislators, Congress, to do anything to stem gun violence in this country.

AMNA NAWAZ: David, you know these numbers when it comes to where the American public is, right?

If we just take a look at these, let's put these up for a second, when -- on Americans' views on gun policy; 58 percent say they favor stricter gun laws; 88 percent support preventing those with mental illnesses from purchasing guns; 64 percent favor banning assault-style weapons.

Of course, there are partisan differences in all of that.

Is there any chance in this Congress of consensus even around red flag laws, lower thresholds?

DAVID BROOKS: Maybe?

I mean, we have the same conversation every time, and nothing seems to happen.

I think, if there is anything different about this one, I would say, first, the cops got there so fast.

Through a series of lucky breaks, I guess, there were people right on the scene, and he was able to do remarkable damage in a little amount of time.

And that's a result of that assault weapon.

And so that -- it really highlights how this time it really did make a difference what kind of weapon the guy was using.

The second thing about this particular case is, this guy was sending off signals left and right, that he was institutionalized.

He had mental health -- his family was sending out warnings.

And they have a yellow flag, which is a watered-down red flag law in Maine.

And, still, he fell through the cracks.

And so, when you see this case, it's much more -- it feels much more preventable than all the other -- not all, but many of the other horrors that have happened.

And how did nobody pick up on this guy?

And so maybe, if you're going to think practically, is there any way we can prevent some of these?

But if past is prologue, probably not.

AMNA NAWAZ: I'm sure we will be having this conversation again sometime soon, unfortunately.

I do want to move on to another big story this week I know you both are paying close attention, and that is, we have a new House speaker.

Took three rounds -- took three weeks, rather, several rounds of voting.

The House GOP elected Mike Johnson of Louisiana.

Jonathan, how did Mike Johnson, who carries a pretty low profile in Congress, how did he succeed where so many others had failed, at least in securing the gavel for now?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: I guess he succeeded because the Republican Conference was playing its own version of "Survivor."

You had McCarthy, then Scalise, then Jim Jordan, and now -- oh, who am I missing?

The one who, oh, Emmer, who lasted four hours as speaker-designate.

What's so unsettling about the fact that Congressman Mike Richards now is speaker -- the speaker -- is -- Mike Johnson -- Speaker Johnson is the person who's gotten the gavel, is, one, we don't know -- really know who he is.

Democratic members of Congress have said to me on air that they had to go to Google to look him up to find out more information about him.

And the more information we find out about him and the more information the American people find out about him, the more I think they're going to be uncomfortable, from his pushing for a national abortion ban, to introducing legislation for a federal so-called don't say gay bill, his comments on homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

Amna, he said way back that legalizing same-sex marriage was a dark harbinger of chaos that could doom even the strongest republic.

I had no idea Nick and I were that powerful.

And now here's this man who is now the speaker of the House, two heartbeats away from the presidency, and he has far right views, far right views that make former Speaker Kevin McCarthy look like a moderate.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, you know your husband loves it whenever you mention him on air too, right?

(LAUGHTER) AMNA NAWAZ: I'm sure he loves that.

(LAUGHTER) AMNA NAWAZ: But, look, David, more seriously, this is a man who's only been in Congress for six years, right?

He's never chaired a committee.

He's not nearly as prolific a fund-raiser as Speaker McCarthy was before him.

It's fair to say there's a real learning curve ahead, right?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, it's a lesson.

We can all rise to great power by being innocuous and unseen, apparently.

For me, the bad news about Johnson is the wing of the evangelical world he emerges from.

And so, for example, one of the people he's praised is a pseudo-historian named David Barton.

And Barton has been -- has a powerful bloc in a subculture of the evangelical world that has been arguing, falsely, that our founders never believed in separation of church and state, that Thomas Jefferson was an ardent Christian who wanted to make this a Christian nation.

And so he is coming from a world where Christian nationalism is very much in the air.

And so that's got to be concerning if he's coming from this world.

On the good side, I have to say his comments on his first day were exemplary.

He talked about extending Ukraine aid, which is super important to a lot of us.

He talked about working with Hakeem Jeffries.

And the most important thing, you look at Matt Gaetz, you look at a lot of these jokers, they don't have any respect for the institution of the Congress.

And Johnson went out of his way to talk about his deep love of the institution of the Congress.

And you can be hard right -- if you respect the traditions and manners of that institution, you want it to work well, then that's an improvement on what I was expecting.

Now, maybe he won't be able to do this.

Maybe he doesn't believe any of this stuff, but I'm willing to sit with day one with the nice things and the right things he did say.

AMNA NAWAZ: It is worth pointing out he did play a key role in trying to overturn the 2020 election results.

That is concerning as well.

DAVID BROOKS: Right, absolutely, yes.

And so if he's going to be a hard right Trumpy, MAGA Mike, then, well, that's where the party is.

But if he can be MAGA Mike and not shut down the government, pass Ukraine aid, then that will be something we can take -- or at least I can take away.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, can he avoid the government shutting down?

There is another deadline looming in a matter of weeks.

Can he work with Democrats?

Could he face the same fate as Speaker McCarthy for reaching across the aisle?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Yes and yes.

Look, Amna, I'm so fixated on the calendar.

While it is weeks between now and November 17, when the deadline is, the House is only supposed to be in session for four legislative days.

That is no time to get anything done.

Already, Politico is reporting tonight that there are Republicans in his conference who are upset by what the speaker said last night on Sean Hannity, which was, he is open to a continuing resolution that could go through January or through April, he says with conditions.

But, already, there's rumblings within the conference that they don't want to go for that.

And the person who said -- who has a problem with this, if I can find his name -- I wrote it down -- Andy Biggs, Congresswoman Andy Biggs, a Republican from Arizona, said that there are at least five Republicans who would go against the brand-new speaker if he were to come up with a deal that would extend the continuing resolution through January or through April.

We are headed to some really rough waters with a speaker, as we were just talking about, who has come from out of nowhere, has never chaired a committee.

We have no idea how he's going to lead this raucous caucus to the resolution -- a resolution that would keep the government open.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, the minute-and-a-half we have left, I just need to ask you about the news out of New Hampshire today, which was Minnesota Congressman Dean Phillips announcing he will run for president against President Biden for the Democratic presidential nomination.

I just want to get your reaction to the announcement and what kind of impact you think it could have.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Come on, man.

The president -- Joe Biden is the president of the United States.

The best way to win the presidency is to already be in it.

The power of incumbency is incredible.

In a race that is already going to be razor-thin, why is Congressman Phillips from the great state of Minnesota -- I love Minnesota -- but in an election that is going to be decided on the margins, why is he jumping into the race to try to weaken the president of his own party, who he used to support and used to be a fanboy of?

I don't understand why he is undertaking such a useless, futile and dangerous exercise.

DAVID BROOKS: I like the "Come on, man."

Now we're all talking like Joe Biden.

(LAUGHTER) DAVID BROOKS: I think that Joe Biden is the Democrats' strongest nominee, and I still think that.

On the other hand, he won't be hurt by beating somebody.

And if he can go win, which I think he will do, then he looks like a little stronger case.

And, also, to be honest, as much as I think Biden has been a very strong president and he's really running the administration, his numbers are just not picking up.

And so if I'm a Democrat, to have some sort of escape hatch, that's not the end of the world to me.

But I -- basically, my core point is counterintuitive with, this will help Biden.

He will go out, campaign, he will win, he will look like a guy who beat somebody, nominee.

AMNA NAWAZ: All right.

(LAUGHTER) AMNA NAWAZ: David Brooks, Jonathan Capehart, good to see you both, as always.

Thank you.

DAVID BROOKS: Good to see you, Amna.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Thanks, Amna.