This is basically the same political problem they have in Europe these days.  The Greek public, for example, seems very confused about what their options are, and are as a consequence being forced into accepting a sort of hostile financial and political takeover from Germany, the banks and other "core" countries.

Part of the problem in Europe and here is that much of the public tends to follow the guidance they are getting from their favored political parties and leaders.   And in the US, both parties are in the business of running interference for the financial sector, resisting serious reform, and aiding the three-decade neoliberal drive for privatization, deregulation and shrinking the public sector.  The differences between the two parties consist mainly in how fast they want to go and how sweeping and aggressive they want to be in pursuing this general tendency.  The Republicans are bold austerity mongers and dismantlers of the public sector; the Democrats are cautious ones who are eager to hang on to more parts of the public sector and readjust to the tax code, even as they privatize and slash.

There is also tremendous public confusion about the nature of federal government finance and our monetary system.  This leads people to lean on poor analogies between household financing and government financing.

Clearly, the Democratic Party is by far the better option for mobilizing a reverse of this tendency.  There are already very sizeable Democratic constituencies who support a change in direction - maybe they are even a majority of the party.   But until we get a reversal among the leadership elite, and the message it sends, we'll have a politics run by the barony of the wealthy elite.

The role of the Occupy movement isn't to win popularity contests, but to push important issues to the top of the agenda, using unconventional methods.   These issues are uncomfortable ones for people to face, and at every step of the way the Occupy movement will face resentment, opprobrium and push-back.  While they should never want to be massively unpopular, if their popularity begins to creep above 50%, they might want to consider the possibility that they are being domesticated and neutralized.

But there is a new egalitarian spirit beginning to sweep the country.  Every day this week I have heard a new story from a major media source about income equality or financial sector outrage.   That's a new development.   What used to be primarily a progressive obsession is now mainstream discussion.  This is a huge success, and it is due primarily to the in-you-face techniques of the occupiers.

(sigh) I'm afraid, once again, the answer is obvious; you are not allowing for the "magical thinking factor."   This factor comes into play in many instances and according to the newly coined, Mr. Smith's law; "when confronted by political paradoxes and conundrums in the 21st century, the first place to look for an explanation is the realm of 'magical thinking.'"  In this specific instance, the problem is that while many people have, through constant repetition and media re-enforcement,  come to believe that smaller government is 'necessary',  no-one wants their own medicare benefits cut.   They rationalize their way out of this conundrum by magically believing that they are special and only one person, after all, and besides, they deserve it, not like those other cheating b*st*rds.