i agree....his momentum become static is not a good thing versus dynamic....
>> his momentum become static is not a good thing <<
Not only that:
It’s an oxymoron, or a logical impossibility. This article definitely could have used a good copy editor!
I don’t read the article that way at all.
In the context the writer is using the word “static”, it’s a good thing.
Writer points out that Obama got a convention bounce lead, but lost that advantage with time.
In contrast, writer points out that once Romney got his great debate bounce, it has had staying power. In other words, it has become “baked in” the cake. That’s what this writer means by static when you remember “context”. Context is everything.
What he’s saying about Romney needing to build even greater momentum is...nothing. Because he’s not addressing that.
His only point is that Romney has not lost what he gained from the debate, whereas Obama lost what he gained from his convention.