I think that at one level no two people or times or ... are ever exactly the same as the other. However, depending on where one looks at the time line of this race as compared to 2004 Edwards and Obama have both been in nearly the same position. Both were young upstarts surging heading into Iowa. Both lost new Hampshire. Both won South Carolina. Both had (have in the case of Obama) a realistic chance at the Democratic nomination. Sure Obama has done better than Edwards did in 2004, but the similarities of two freshman senators who are gifted orators pursuing the White House with a short political resume and posting strong results ... seems similar enough to me. Analogies do function on the both/and principle of being both similar and different. Tiger Woods is both similar and different from Roger Federer. They are not identical. Woods has never had to return a 130 mph serve to win Wimbledon and Federer has never had to stick a 12' put to win the Masters, but similarities can be drawn right? Same with Edwards in 04 and Obama in 08. One thing Edwards has done, that Obama has not yet done, is be part of a national ticket during a presidential election general election. So, in a sense it cuts the other way, but I think the analogy is strong enough to stand.