I argue that is good for Bush and the Republicans.
You assume the recall won't succeed in your point #1. The recall needs to have signatures from only 6% of all registered voters (12% of those who voted in the last election and only 1/2 the registered voters turned out) to qualify.
If you believe recall organizers cannot get 6% of the state's registered voters to sign a petition against a man with a 74% disapproval rating then you are seriously underestimating the strength of our organizational efforts thus far.
Well, you seem to assume that it will succeed.
But if you read my posts carefully, my thinking that the effort is a waste is based not on the assumption that it won't succeed, but that my belief that even if it succeeds (not only in getting on the ballot, but in actually recalling Davis) it probably won't accomplish much, and may actually hurt. (You seem to interpret success as just getting on the ballot. That's too narrow. Success is replacing Davis with a governor who will have substantially different policies and be able to carry them through a very hostile Democrat assembly). Here are the possible results as I see it:
Step 1. Get on ballot. $1 million, lots of time and energy by grassroots. If failure, Davis stronger than ever. If success, step 2.
Step 2. Recall campaign. $__ million, lots of time and energy by grassroots. If failure, Davis stronger than ever. If success, go to 3.
Step 3, Result A. $__ million, lots of time and energy. Davis replaced with Democrat, probably with similar views. No change in state policies, state no better off. Democrats strengthened by eviction of unpopular incumbent. Steam let off in the electorate; Democrats strengthened heading into 2004 and 2006; or...
Result B1, Davis replaced with Republican, facing hostile legislature, huge problems. Takes blame for unpopular tax hikes or spending cuts, which may or may not get through legislature. State maybe or maybe not better off, depending on what gets through legislature. Dems in legislature better off, blaming GOP governor; Dems stronger for 2004 Senate/2006 Asssembly, leading to longer term Dem control, bad for state; or ...
Result B2, Davis replaced with Republican who is hugely successful in restoring state's economy; state better off; maybe GOP reaps benefits, sweeps to victory in 2004 and 2006.
Result B2 is the only one that's worth it, and it's probably least likely.
Look, I don't want bad things for California just so we can elect more Republicans (Conservatives, really) down the road (in fact, if Davis survives this, I'll be rooting for him to get out of his mess, because that will be good for California), but you've also got to be realistic about what will cause meaningful change.