I've been reading reports and analysis since the Kyoto Protocols. The most fascinating things since that time is that we (the US) were behind in those requirements but significantly ahead of everyone else. The Paris Agreement is roughly the same so far too.

In a situation where "we're behind" and "we're ahead" are both accurate statements point to a significant problem in the approach.

You choosing one of them exclusively means you're playing for "your team" instead of looking at reality of the situation which is neither useful nor honest.