The destruction of monarchy's powers is certainly one similarity in all of these movements. In a larger sense, I might also suggest that all of these moments in history captured the essence of sensing what can be and materializing it into what is. The American Revolution understood the issue of economic and political freedom as something that can be articulated from the realm of the conditional and placing into the present. The French Revolution conceived of power as an exercise that is not theoretical, but can be practical. The Glorious Revolution sought to construct a power basis that wrestled away power from the monarchy into the hands of Parliament style legislature. In each of these instances, the vision that seemed to elude grasp was taken and seized into a particular moment and owned. One can debate the success of these measures after this moment was realized, and to this point, there would be great divergence. However, one cannot deny the fact that each of these revolutions transformed reality from what can be into what is.
The only similarity I can see between these three revolutions is that each of them was to some extent about democracy or, at least, about reducing the power of a monarchy.
The French and American Revolutions were, of course, very bloody things. The Glorious Revolution was not.
The French and American Revolutions both completely did away with monarchy, at least within the countries where they happened. Of course, the American Revolution did not destroy the British monarchy -- it just took the US out from under its rule.
The Glorious Revolution did not destroy the British monarchy, but it did severely limit its powers. It made Parliament much more important than it had been and, arguably, made it more important than the Crown.
So all three greatly reduced the power of a monarchy. This is the only similarity I can see, but it is a major one.