even if you agree with them they went about it completely wrong.

If their aim was a public airing of grievances, then the occupiers got all the publicity they sought and were able to present themselves in their own words. Their manifestos were listened to. They were able to thoroughly publicize their grievances and their political theories. Their definitions of what was wrong and what ought to be done about it were correctly reported.

But time and time again, the history of the refuge, the body of Constitutional law, and the facts of the Hammonds' case refuted all their arguments, revealed their version of the facts to be baseless, and rendered their political theories mostly nonsensical. They obviously expected to be formidable, not just because of their guns, but because of the force of their ideas, and instead by exposing their ideas to the full light of examination and debate, they showed themselves to be ridiculously misinformed and their reasoning threadbare.

So, they got everything they wanted except the desired outcome.