What part of Occupy Baltimore in what it wants is uniformed everywhere, as in Occupy Cleveland?  I looked in the article on Occupy Cleveland and it isn't the same as Occupy Baltimore.  But, you are free to believe there is some sort of uberuniformity, a uniformity that makes it impossible to understand what they want, but also is in uniformed agreement that the people in a town should not work with the authorities if you like.  You can also spin it whatever way it is like, to be able to put things into your own comfortable view of the world, if you like.  Constantly looking for this spin will do that, and then you can go to sleep at night, knowing you are right.

Second, point out what individuals are actively excluded from the Occupy movement, where they are blacklisted and so on?  Show that.  Occupy movement is now global, with people from major cities around the globe.  Show where active exclusion is happening.  Only reason why people get excluded is because they don't want to be associated with people with different opinions.  Or maybe it is just Liberals are more tolerate of diversity than conservatives, so they allow others to speak and allow for plurality.

Third, you are SERIOUSLY claiming that, worldwide, there are less people in occupy movements globally than were down at Wall Street when it first started?  Are you seriously claiming that?  If so, you need to show it.  What has been reported is that people down at Wall Street actively camping out has declined, due to the weather.  However, for you to say the movement itself has less protesters than when it started, would require you to show such.  Can you?

You know those "protests" are one huge BS and "protesters" are scumbags in an instant when enemies of your state openly support and applaud to them
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/video/video-occupy-wall-street-hits-iran/article2210536/

It's not that I'm surprised. When you have stupid young girls sleeping in tents with complete strangers, especially ones who are part of a morally suspect movement, rape is bound to occur. The fact that there is another "occupation" whose literature actually encourages its members not to take such matters to the police just seems emblematic of this whole stupid movement: a bunch of naive children screaming about how they could run the world so much better when, in reality, they know absolutely nothing. If I had a nickel for every time I've heard one of these geniuses ranting about how we'd all be so much better off if we could only eliminate money, I could bail out the banks again all by myself. (What would they get rid of next? Division of labor?)

You seem kind of distraught (then again, you usually do), so I really don't know how to respond to the rest of your womanish outburst. I'll only remind you that you were appalled by a few misspelled signs at the tea parties not so very long ago, but now you brush off this kind of abject insanity like it's nothing.

1) I can't understand what your saying here.  In gereal what the "commune style" general election votes for is very specifically what said protest group is for.  In general the occupy general movements have argued for autonomy and set up their own governments...  Occupy Baltimore wants rape victims to not go to the police, this is very much their motive.

2)  Nothing you said is actually different from the tea party... so I'm not sure why you think it is. Well outside of Fox news getting booed away from coverying occupy.  I can't remember any story of tea party people running out others.

3)   No.  I'm claiming that the Occupy Wallstreet movement is smaller then the Tea Party was when it started... debuning your "less people are excluded" arguement. 

Worldwide can be tricky because the Occupy movements in Europe are just an extension of the anti-austerity riots that have already been going on due to Europeon citizens being unwilling to deal with decades of reckless deficit spending, but in the US....

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/17/the-geography-of-occupying-wall-street-and-everywhere-else/

Occupy Wallstreet is nothing but a less focused, less popular tea party.  (Though it's more popular at this time, it's less popular then the tea party was at the time of it's birth.  These things have a natural progression.)

Rifts are already forming among the protesters, and those with the majority view or at least in control appear to be more along the line of communal communist types which likely will lead to huge fractions.  Which is kidna a problem with the whole communal system.  You still do end up with leaders... who more often then not fufill their own goals.  The pouring in of money to occup wallstreet is probably the worst thing that could of happened to it.

You in fact CAN say that it's official demands are silly AND it's unfocused specifically because just like Anonymous, while they SAY there are no leaders, there very clearly are people regarded as such, who have the influence, standing and position to try and shape things to fit their personal agendas.

The demands of the leaders, considered by them as official, are silly and damaging.  While the larger movement is wholey unfocused and don't really know what they want.

Wow, so Iran allows protests in the street... Gee, considering how the government is run, why would it be a surprise that it came out like that?  So, how much did George Soros pay Iran to do that, since Soros is now being spun as the mastermind behind the Occupy movement?

I just wanted to add something about the popularity of the Tea Party vs. Occupy Wallstreet ...

From what I remember, the Tea Party protests started out with similarly high levels of public support in public opinion polls but this support slowly eroded as the media portrayed them as "racists" and more and more unpopular politicians became involved with the movement.

Based on what I have seen, I would anticipate the "downfall" of the Occupy Wallstreet movement to be much more rapid. The reason for this is simple, there are far too many Occupy Wallstreet protestors that are insane or completely lack self-awareness that open the protest up to ridicule; and even the typical left-leaning humourists ignoring the easy home-runs doesn’t protect these people from ridicule. To explain what I mean, in the last week we have had stories about theft being the number 1 problem within the camps and one of these protestors who are (supposedly) poor and lack material wealth had a $5500 Macbook pro stolen (I suppose an affordable laptop that most of us buy is too "poor" for the poor), Occupy Calgary made international news because their #1 demand for donations was condoms, there have been a few reports of rape and sexual abuse in these occupations (one involving a women in Toronto having her feet smelled by a strange man) and the occupy groups are printing literature suggesting women shouldn't go to the police after being abused, and there are countless videos online of the Occupy groups being ant-Semitic, crazy or high.

To simplify what I am saying ...

Long before they get the opportunity to be co-opted by unpopular politicians and annoy people by presuring elected officials to pass unpopular legislation, the Occupy groups will be unpopular because they will be seen as a bunch of loons.

Go ahead, spread the meme the Occupy movements are "Obamavilles" and be done with it. Maybe you wouldn't want to do that, because that would then make Mitt Romney or Herman Cain (at this point) FDR. If it is Cain, then his 9-0-9 plan would end up being a New Deal. Maybe he could start World War III and the roaches who look back at human history could then find economic books and attribute the restart of civilization with roaches as a great economic stimulant.

It's tempting, but I can't stoop to pretending that these are modern day Hoovervilles if only because that would mean validating these miscreants' romantic notions that they are the poor and downtrodden when in reality they're largely just economic illiterates who are frustrated by their inability to parlay a master's degree in self-absorbed navel-gazing into wealth beyond measure.

OWS gets a lesson in hygiene and dignity from a homeless man:

Do you think loans would be given out in "self-absored navel-gazing" if those getting such said degrees would be able to file bankruptcy and get out of them, when they couldn't a job?  Individual stupidity doesn't turn into a debt level exceeding that of credit cards, unless enabled.