Over at CNN is this article, trying to explain why Occupy's May Day protests largely fizzled, especially compared to the success that the Tea Parties have had. Despite trying to spin in favor of Occupy, the message largely is this: If you want people on your side, you have to have a side.
The article is very good, and I recommend you read it. However, I believe it misses two very important points.
First: The Tea Parties were successful, not because they were Organized (as implied by the article), but because they had one clear goal: Stop the Spending. They've moved on from that single goal, and now different Tea Parties in different areas have slightly divergent views- as any non-centralized movement will do. However that single goal still remains: Stop the Spending. Occupy, by contrast, has none of that. Even within one Occupy "camp" there are competing messages all trying to be "the message." This small group wants to focus on ending Capitalism. This small group wants to focus on "Corruption." This other small group wants to focus on raping vulnerable girls. The messages are rarely complimentary, and often in conflict. This makes it hard to have a "movement" at all.
Second: The Tea Parties were successful because they had an actual plan: Stop the Spending. I know, novel, right? But the movement was there to back the plan, not just to get media attention. In many respects, the movement was the plan: Stop the Spending. People showed up at Town Hall meetings, they wrote their Senators and Representatives, they voted, and, ultimately, they challenged sitting Senators and Representatives who had proven resistant to the message: Stop the Spending. Compare to Occupy: they have no plan. Well, not beyond riot and vandalism and the occasional rape. These are college kids who still believe that if you have "a vision" people will support you. Their colleges have largely failed them in this respect; no one will follow you because you have "a vision." They follow you when you have a credible plan for fulfilling that vision.
As a bonus, and one other dirty little (open) secret: the Tea Parties were not funded by any major group. Oh, there are now "major Tea Party Groups" such as the Tea Party Express and FreedomWorks that make big money from the Tea Party movement, but they existed second; the movement existed first. Occupy, on the other hand, was largely funded (initially) by big donors such as George "Nazi Collaborator" Soros, and received a great deal of assistance from unions, including the SEIU.
So, to recap: The Tea Party succeeded because they had both a single, unifying, and clear goal: Stop the Spending, which was backed by an actual plan of action. The Occupy Movement has mostly failed (except in decreasing property values, and getting people raped) because they have neither.