The protests did start because of the extradition bill, but the bill has been dead for more than a month[0], yet the protests have not stopped. Can you see that the protestors are protesting about something else now? If the bill were the protesters' goal, they had already succeeded.

The situation is so much more complicated than just an ill-conceived bill. It doesn't help things when media (or other people) try to simplify things and frame it as something as clear cut as David vs Goliath.

[0]: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-china-48918096/carrie...

No, the bill is not dead. It's in stasis, but can be revived any moment. Your own link even says so explicitly: She stopped short of saying it had been withdrawn completely

Because of both the bill and the initial response to the protests, the protesters are now asking for the government (governor?) to step down. I can't say I disagree.

There seems to be a distinction between "withdrawn" and "dead."

Although the bill has not been formally withdrawn, on 9 July, Hong Kong's chief executive Carrie Lam said she has stopped the amendment process and reiterated there is 'no plan' to restart this process in the Legislative Council, stating: "the bill is dead".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Hong_Kong_extradition_bil...

The U.S. Senate has killed many bills from the House not by voting on them and the bills failed to pass, but by not bringing them up for a vote. It's just procedural.

The U.S. senate isn’t run in the background by a totalitarian state.