None of your alternants are correct, I'm afraid. Direct objects are very rarely subordinate clauses like the infinitival "you to go there". In almost all instances, direct objects are noun (inc pronoun) phrases. In your example "want" is a catenative verb, "you" is direct object and to go there is catenative complement of "want". It's catenative in the sense of 'chain' of verbs, because that's what you have here, even though the 2 verbs have an intervening object, "you", and hence it's called a complex catenative construction.
Semantically, "you" is subject of the subordinate clause, but syntactically it's object of the matrix clause.
EDIT: To reiterate the above with some syntactic evidence:
The catenative complement is "to go there", not "you to go there", for the latter is not a constituent, but a sequence of direct object + complement. There are two tests to show that "you" must be object of the matrix verb "want":
1 . Insertion of adjunct. With "want", the intervening NP "you" in the complex catenative construction behaves like an object of the matrix clause in that it can’t be separated from the verb by an adjunct, such as "later", cf. *"I want later you to go there". Its inadmissibility is just like that of the non-catenative *"I want later your attention".
2. The 'pseudo-cleft' construction. Forming a pseudo-cleft would yield the ungrammatical *"What I want is you to go there"; instead we would say “What I want is for you to go there” (where “for” marks the beginning of an infinitival clause). It’s ungrammatical because "you to go there" is not a syntactic constituent and thus cannot be placed in the position of complement to the verb "be". And the reason it is not a syntactic constituent is because it is a sequence of two complements of "want", i.e. "you" is object and "to go there" is a non-finite clause functioning as catenative complement.
Finally, "you” is a raised object. "I" is not an argument of "want", thus "want" has three complements ("I", “you” and "to go there", but only two arguments "you" and "to go there"). This shows that "you" is a raised object: the verb that it relates to syntactically is higher in the constituent structure than the one it relates to semantically.