Rashi, who is the only one who explains that piece, says that there are two possible ways of explaining the gemoro’s statement that “if Mashiach is from the dead, it’s Daniel”:
1. It was Daniel himself.
2. It will be someone (alive) who is like Daniel (who is no longer alive).
sechel then countered by saying that the gemoro says ???? ????? ??? ??????, and apprently sechel wants to say that since kegon means ‘similar to’, as it so often does, there’s nothing wrong with saying that any other dead person may be Mashiach.
Tell me, are you intentionally ignoring what Rashi himself writes explicitly?
“??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ???? ??? ?????”
“If it is someone who died, it was already Daniel… and [the word] ???? is inexact“. So Rashi is clearly saying that ???? here does NOT mean ‘similar to’.
Please check sources before you quote blithely.