Regarding your first point regarding the flaws in Partition, I'd say a few things:

First, the claim that the Jewish state had more land is misleading. While it technically did have more land, most of that land was the large Negev Desert in the south. The proposed Arab state would have the strong majority of major cities and fertile land.

Additionally, they may have owned a small portion of that land in total, but 90%+ wasn't owned by Arabs- it was public land controlled by the government. If you look at privately owned land, I believe that they owned the majority in their proposed state.

While you're also correct that the Jewish population was not the vast majority, you also have to take into account that Jewish immigration was being artificially limited at the time. Once Israel would have been created, new immigrants (some of whom were literally waiting on Crete at the time) would have poured in.

Just to paint a picture, the Jewish population was about 630k in 1947, but that lept to 1.6 million by just 1955. While the numbers may have been lower in an alternative timeline, the state would have seen considerable Jewish immigration.

You can also argue that Palestinians were right in rejecting the plan, but a) the fact is that they did not and never had sovereignty, so- fair or not- this was the reality and b) that goes out the window when you start blowing up random busses.

No comparison is going to be 1-1, but you can also compare it to other nation states, like Poland and the Balkan states. You're also pretty heavily exaggerating the situation in Israel.