As per the definition:
$C_t:=\frac{S_t-F_t}{F_t}$
Per the article, it should actually be: (tomorrow minus today ) divided by today:
$C_t=\frac{F_{t+1}-F_t}{F_t}$
but they assume price does not change so $S_{t+1}=S_t$. An equivalent assumption for the bond would be that the YTM does not change. But there are two predictable (model free) characteristics of bonds: it pays coupon and its maturity shrinks as time progresses. So tomorrow (t+1) the same bond will have one fewer day to maturity, and if tomorrow happened to be a coupon date, then the bond holder will get coupon as well, so the equivalent of $F_ {t+1}$ is $P^{T-1}_{t+1}+D (\,\mathrm{if}\; t+1 \;\mathrm{is \,coupon \,date}\,)$
Re-comment, the price of the asset or exchange rate is a random process so it will vary over time, and then there is the arbitrage/parity type relationship between the current price and the forward/future price. In the calculation of their carry, they assumed that the price remains constant over time, but the parity relationships are deterministic so they hold. If you have a non-dividend paying stock, then $F_t=S_t (1+r)$. If you substitute into the carry equation:
$C_t:=\frac{S_t-F_t}{F_t}=\frac{S_t-S_t (1+r^f)}{F_t}=-r^f \frac{S_t}{F_t}$
So the carry is minus funding rate. And if you have a dividend paying stock or FX, then $F_t=S_t (1+r)-E[D]$,so carry will be dividend minus the funding rate:
$C_t:=\frac{S_t-F_t}{F_t}=\frac{S_t-S_t (1+r^f)+E[D]}{F_t}=\left(\frac{E[D]}{S_t}-r^f \right)\frac{S_t}{F_t}$
So essentially they assume the price is not random over time, but parity type relationships hold.