Who can blame them?

Democrat Gray Davis, who is now being supported by national Democrats including Bill Clinton and Jesse Jackson, has temporarily been saved from an Oct. 7 recall by a liberal three-judge panel. If the decision stands - the 9th Circuit's 11-judge panel is revisting the decision Monday - and the election rolls until March, most observers believe Davis will prevail.

That's a good bet. Many people believe this partisan court, which in some years has been reversed by the Supreme Court on nearly nine out of 10 decisions, wants to save Democrats from a surging Republican-led recall effort. Davis is disliked, and Californians have had enough, so Democrats are relying on a handful of appointed judges to save them.

Although I share this revulsion to the 9th Circuit and the panel's asinine delay of an election, I wonder whether the decision, whether it is overturned or not, could be a blessing in disguise by energizing California voters behind the recall out of disgust for the court. The delay could also give Republicans more time to unite behind one candidate rather than split the vote between two.

Last weekend at the California Republican Party Convention in Los Angeles, delegates, politicians and the media were focused on one thing: Will state Sen. Tom McClintock step aside to help actor Arnold Schwarzenegger win the recall election? People wanted to know whether Schwarzenegger, who holds liberal views on many issues, could make peace with the party's conservative base. A Republican cannot win a statewide election in California by only appealing to conservatives, but good luck winning without them.

Schwarzenegger seemed to succeed, but a poll released early that weekend showed Davis gaining ground and Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante in the lead to replace the governor if the recall succeeds. Some media reports portrayed the convention as a fount of optimism. Granted, given the party's dismal success in the last nine years, this was as optimistic as I had ever seen an assembled group of California Republicans.

Nevertheless, many people were worried, yours truly included.

The math is quite simple: Bustamante's support has stalled, thanks to his far-left political appeal and the criticism he has received for his acceptance of millions of dollars of questionable campaign donations from Indian tribes. But if McClintock surges, and Schwarzenegger falls, the Democrats have a good chance of retaining the office.

Schwarzenegger aide George Gorton fears a planned independent expenditure from Indian casino interests on behalf of McClintock will cut directly into Schwarzenegger's support. The Indians actually want Bustamante, so they will support McClintock to harm Schwarzenegger.

The McClintock forces believe that Schwarzenegger will stall once his celebrity aura wanes, and people start demanding specific solutions to the state's problems. If McClintock tops 20 percent in the polls, they say, the 51 percent of Schwarzenegger supporters who call themselves conservatives will flock to McClintock. That's the point at which McClintock looks like he can win.

I'm not so sure.

This refrain is common: "We love Tom, a true-blue believer in limited government who knows where the bodies are buried in Sacramento, but we are voting for Schwarzenegger because he can win, and we sure as heck don't want Bustamante."

Schwarzenegger supporters believe most conservatives will do as stated above, and they see the McClintock strategy as a pipe dream. They doubt that McClintock has the 18 percent support shown by the Sept. 13 Los Angeles Times poll. They know he doesn't have anywhere near enough money to run a credible statewide race. Some conservatives think he is too dogged and self-assured to work with legislators, and they fear what will happen if McClintock is a spoiler.

U.S. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach, lauded Schwarzenegger's Saturday speech, in which the actor labeled himself a small-government conservative, referred to Ronald Reagan's legacy, including a staunch stance against the forces of communism.

"Gray Davis isn't riding a tank into Budapest," Rohrabacher told me, "but he is destroying the economy of California. If McClintock stays in, he screws conservatives. If we lose by 2 percent, Republicans will look at conservatives as spoilers. If Arnold wins anyway, and McClintock gets 10 percent, Arnold will say, 'Why do we need these guys?'"

For his part, McClintock talked at his press conference about Californians, their backs against the wall, rallying to save their state through his candidacy. "It's time to paint our positions in bold colors, not bland pastels." And he was unequivocal in his refusal to get out of the race.

You see what's happening here. The principled, disciplined but underfunded McClintock might have enough moxie to drive down Schwarzenegger's support. But, realistically speaking, it's a longshot that Schwarzenegger will fade away, given his celebrity appeal and his support among moderate Republicans, independents and even some Democrats.

The result: Schwarzenegger and McClintock each do well enough to assure Bustamante's victory. The recall will have been for naught, and that's assuming Davis will even lose it.

Although the Times poll tends to be a bit out of sync with others, all the polls show slipping support for Question 1: whether or not to recall the Immobile Governor, the man who does nothing while Sacramento burns. The Times had support at 50 percent to 47 percent. That's wafer-thin. And Davis' last-minute Democratic partisanship, and strategy of depicting the recall as illegitimate, appears to be having some effect.

I still think Davis would lose - if the election is held Oct. 7. But while Davis is busy campaigning to save himself, his opponents are sniping at each other. No one, really, is making the direct case for removing the governor from office. It's not a done deal.

But thanks to the activists on the 9th Circuit, recall supporters have a new rallying point. As the San Francisco Chronicle reported, "The decision ... sent a unifying jolt of energy through the state's most avid pro-recall forces as campaigns and candidates tried Tuesday to sort out what the court's decision could mean."

The court's reasoning is bizarre. It wants to postpone the election until March because voters in six counties would be disenfranchised because they would be forced to use the same punch-card voting machines that have been used for several decades in California, and which were used to elect Davis to office the last two times. The court believed it is a dire problem when people "undervote" - i.e., do not vote on every question or race on a ballot.

Don't think about it too much. We'll see what the 11-member "en banc" panel decides, and whether the case makes its way to the Supreme Court, which might be leery about looking at it given the divisive experiences in Bush vs. Gore.

The three-judge panel's ruling should be overturned. The election should go on as scheduled. A new date in March will not only cause new problems, but will be a boon for Davis, little question about it.

Still, whether sanity prevails or not, disgusted Californians will have yet another reason to get energized, remove the incompetent Davis from office, and replace him with someone better.

Even a nattering nabob of negativism like me needs to look for silver linings.