You're suggesting that having his cake and eating it too should mean [1] remaining unbound by onerous treaties(because the Paris deal is not very binding and [2] winning the favour of other nations in the deal as well as voters at home who support the deal.
But there is a different cake that he likes to have and eat better: [1] remaining unbound by onerous treaties through the act of withdrawing from them altogether [2] appealing to his base at home by refusing to acknowledge GHG emissions as a problem as well as by appearing to stand up for america by declining to engage in any sort of compromise with other nations.
So he won't withdraw because of any teeth that the deal has.
If he withdraws it will be to keep up the appearance of sharing the same values and beliefs as his constituency.
But there is a different cake that he likes to have and eat better: [1] remaining unbound by onerous treaties through the act of withdrawing from them altogether [2] appealing to his base at home by refusing to acknowledge GHG emissions as a problem as well as by appearing to stand up for america by declining to engage in any sort of compromise with other nations.
So he won't withdraw because of any teeth that the deal has.
If he withdraws it will be to keep up the appearance of sharing the same values and beliefs as his constituency.
Whether or not that's dumb, I can't really say.