What began this year as a political crisis over utility prices has been transformed into a wider venting of frustration with a state that many Bulgarians feel has failed to live up to the promises of the 1989 revolution that overthrew communism, or even to improve their daily lives.

Iveta Cherneva, a Bulgarian author who has attended most of the demonstrations, said the protesters saw themselves as part of a larger global movement. “In many places there is deep underlying discontent with governments which are not responsive to the people who elected them,” she said. “And since last night, the protests here are similar to the others in one more way: the police started using disproportionate force against peaceful demonstrators — something we in Bulgaria thought would never happen.”

Metodi Litsev, 34, who has participated in the protests, compared them to clashes in Turkey and the Occupy movement, saying, “If there weren’t protests in Taksim or Wall Street, we might not have found the moral example to seek our emancipation.”

So far, Mr. Oresharski has stood his ground against calls to step down, buttressed by hundreds of supporters who have also held regular demonstrations, and now by the police.

Ivan Krastev, chairman of the Center for Liberal Strategies, a research institute based in Sofia, said domestic unrest, coupled with external criticism from the European Union, had undermined the new government’s credibility. “Even if the government stays in power, it is not in a position to govern,” he said.

The daily demonstrations were initially provoked by the appointment of Delyan Peevski, an influential media mogul who has close ties to the government, as head of the national security agency. The appointment was immediately rescinded, but that did not quell discontent over what some demonstrators insisted was an example of shadowy business interests capturing the state.

On Tuesday, protesters were infuriated by the government’s decision to borrow about $676 million, which would raise the budget deficit to 2 percent of gross domestic product. They saw the move as unnecessary and damaging to the economy.